From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.2 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C9601C7618B for ; Thu, 25 Jul 2019 13:48:37 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A90AD22BEF for ; Thu, 25 Jul 2019 13:48:37 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S2390572AbfGYNsg (ORCPT ); Thu, 25 Jul 2019 09:48:36 -0400 Received: from mail2-relais-roc.national.inria.fr ([192.134.164.83]:54090 "EHLO mail2-relais-roc.national.inria.fr" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S2389122AbfGYNsg (ORCPT ); Thu, 25 Jul 2019 09:48:36 -0400 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.64,306,1559512800"; d="scan'208";a="393302470" Received: from c-73-22-29-55.hsd1.il.comcast.net (HELO hadrien) ([73.22.29.55]) by mail2-relais-roc.national.inria.fr with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 25 Jul 2019 15:48:32 +0200 Date: Thu, 25 Jul 2019 08:48:30 -0500 (CDT) From: Julia Lawall X-X-Sender: jll@hadrien To: Markus Elfring cc: cocci@systeme.lip6.fr, kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, David Laight , Joe Perches Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] string: Add stracpy and stracpy_pad mechanisms In-Reply-To: <7e489aa8-95ea-b3b0-9023-ba284212977f@web.de> Message-ID: References: <7e489aa8-95ea-b3b0-9023-ba284212977f@web.de> User-Agent: Alpine 2.21 (DEB 202 2017-01-01) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, 25 Jul 2019, Markus Elfring wrote: > > @r@ > > identifier f,i1,i2; > > struct i1 e1; > > expression e2; > > position p; > > @@ > > \(strscpy\|strlcpy\)(e1.f, e2, i2)@p > > I have got the impression that the replacement can work also > without an inherited position variable at the end. > How do you think about to omit this SmPL rule then? > > Can it be nicer to reduce duplicate SmPL code a bit? Huh? Rule 2 is important, to ensure that ths size is correct. Without rule 1, how can rule 2 be checked? julia