From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Liam Breck Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 0/5] bq27xxx_battery data memory update Date: Sun, 17 Sep 2017 17:45:38 -0700 Message-ID: References: <20170824033617.20840-1-liam@networkimprov.net> <20170829105413.6wbejdaxxxd6hk7b@earth> <0bf4ba2f-18f9-1204-8241-8acb6ac6f490@ti.com> <20170829212259.gs4bljwscrprsfjl@earth> <20170830002939.ns43wldvffmwqhuv@earth> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Return-path: Received: from mail-it0-f68.google.com ([209.85.214.68]:35784 "EHLO mail-it0-f68.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752218AbdIRApj (ORCPT ); Sun, 17 Sep 2017 20:45:39 -0400 Received: by mail-it0-f68.google.com with SMTP id u2so4060774itb.2 for ; Sun, 17 Sep 2017 17:45:39 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-pm-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-pm@vger.kernel.org To: Julia Lawall Cc: Sebastian Reichel , Gilles Muller , Nicolas Palix , Michal Marek , cocci@systeme.lip6.fr, "Andrew F. Davis" , =?UTF-8?Q?Pali_Roh=C3=A1r?= , Linux PM mailing list Hi Julia, checking back... On Tue, Sep 5, 2017 at 1:14 PM, Julia Lawall wrote: > > > On Tue, 5 Sep 2017, Liam Breck wrote: > >> Hi Julia, any luck on this? > > I was trying to improve the parser, but it seems that my improvements > don't have a sufficient effect so I will try your suggestion of just > seding out the offending code. > > julia > >> >> On Thu, Aug 31, 2017 at 4:43 AM, Liam Breck wrote: >> > On Thu, Aug 31, 2017 at 4:33 AM, Julia Lawall wrote: >> >> >> >> >> >> On Thu, 31 Aug 2017, Liam Breck wrote: >> >> >> >>> On Thu, Aug 31, 2017 at 2:54 AM, Julia Lawall wrote: >> >>> > >> >>> > >> >>> > On Tue, 29 Aug 2017, Liam Breck wrote: >> >>> > >> >>> >> Coccinelle folks, >> >>> >> >> >>> >> On Tue, Aug 29, 2017 at 5:29 PM, Sebastian Reichel >> >>> >> wrote: >> >>> >> > Hi, >> >>> >> > >> >>> >> > On Tue, Aug 29, 2017 at 04:07:12PM -0700, Liam Breck wrote: >> >>> >> >> I don't see a Julia in CC list... >> >>> >> > >> >>> >> > <_< let's try that again. >> >>> >> > >> >>> >> >> On Tue, Aug 29, 2017 at 2:22 PM, Sebastian Reichel >> >>> >> >> wrote: >> >>> >> >> > [adding Julia to Cc for Coccinelle question] >> >>> >> >> > >> >>> >> >> > Hi, >> >>> >> >> > >> >>> >> >> > On Tue, Aug 29, 2017 at 10:31:57AM -0500, Andrew F. Davis wrote: >> >>> >> >> >> On 08/29/2017 05:54 AM, Sebastian Reichel wrote: >> >>> >> >> >> > On Wed, Aug 23, 2017 at 08:36:12PM -0700, Liam Breck wrote: >> >>> >> >> >> >> Overview: >> >>> >> >> >> >> * Reorganizes chip data definitions >> >>> >> >> >> >> * Enables features landed in these patches: >> >>> >> >> >> >> dt-bindings: power: supply: bq27xxx: Add monitored-battery documentation >> >>> >> >> >> >> power: supply: bq27xxx: Add chip data memory read/write support >> >>> >> >> >> >> power: supply: bq27xxx: Add power_supply_battery_info support >> >>> >> >> >> >> * Supports the following chips (only BQ27425 is active) >> >>> >> >> >> >> BQ27500, 545, 425, 421, 441, 621 >> >>> >> >> >> >> >> >>> >> >> >> >> Changes in v3: >> >>> >> >> >> >> * BQ27425 tested; workaround minor chip bug >> >>> >> >> >> >> * Dropped driver_version >> >>> >> >> >> >> * Fixed dbg_dupes logic for .props & .dm_regs >> >>> >> >> >> >> * Dropped two props array dupes >> >>> >> >> >> >> >> >>> >> >> >> >> Changes in v2: >> >>> >> >> >> >> * Added di->opts flags for remaining chip features >> >>> >> >> >> >> * Commented out untested bq27xxx_dm_regs parameters >> >>> >> >> >> >> * Changed dbg_dupes to run only once >> >>> >> >> >> >> >> >>> >> >> >> >> Notes on v1: >> >>> >> >> >> >> * Not fully tested (hence RFC tag) >> >>> >> >> >> > >> >>> >> >> >> > Thanks, full series queued. >> >>> >> >> >> > >> >>> >> >> >> > -- Sebastian >> >>> >> >> >> >> >>> >> >> >> Anyway, I've not got the time to fight these changes anymore, but at >> >>> >> >> >> very least could you drop 4/5, it's static analysis code made into a >> >>> >> >> >> runtime check built into a kernel driver, if not at least add my >> >>> >> >> >> nacked-by. :) >> >>> >> >> > >> >>> >> >> > Since it's not critical at all and nobody depends on it, I dropped 4/5 >> >>> >> >> > for now. I agree, that checking it at runtime is not nice. On the other >> >>> >> >> > hand I do think a duplication check makes sense. Doing a static >> >>> >> >> > check should be possible, but I have no idea how to implement this >> >>> >> >> > (without much effort). I suspect Coccinelle can do it, so I added >> >>> >> >> > Julia. >> >>> >> >> > >> >>> >> >> > For reference this is the runtime check: >> >>> >> >> > https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/9918953/ >> >>> >> >> >>> >> The data structures being checked start here: >> >>> >> https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/sre/linux-power-supply.git/tree/drivers/power/supply/bq27xxx_battery.c?h=for-next#n138 >> >>> >> >> >>> >> And are aggregated here: >> >>> >> https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/sre/linux-power-supply.git/tree/drivers/power/supply/bq27xxx_battery.c?h=for-next#n743 >> >>> > >> >>> > I worked a bit on this, but unfortunately there is a major parsing >> >>> > problem, and most of the definitions are ignored. Specifically, the >> >>> > definitions of the regs variables are interspersed with eg: >> >>> > >> >>> > #define bq27510g1_regs bq27500_regs >> >>> >> >>> You can transform the macros with sed to either of: >> >>> >> >>> static u8 *bq27510g1_regs = 0 // skip comparison if x == 0 >> >>> >> >>> static u8 bq27510g1_regs[BQ27XXX_REG_MAX] = { 0xFF } // skip >> >>> comparison if x[0] == 0xff >> >>> >> >>> Does that help? >> >> >> >> Not quite, because it's really a list of variable declarations, like >> >> >> >> int a, b, c, d; >> >> >> >> The following could be fine: >> >> >> >> *bq27510g1_regs = 0, >> > >> > i forgot about the static u8 at the top of the array set. But yes, >> > just drop static u8 from either of the alternatives I gave. >> From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: liam@networkimprov.net (Liam Breck) Date: Sun, 17 Sep 2017 17:45:38 -0700 Subject: [Cocci] [PATCH v3 0/5] bq27xxx_battery data memory update In-Reply-To: References: <20170824033617.20840-1-liam@networkimprov.net> <20170829105413.6wbejdaxxxd6hk7b@earth> <0bf4ba2f-18f9-1204-8241-8acb6ac6f490@ti.com> <20170829212259.gs4bljwscrprsfjl@earth> <20170830002939.ns43wldvffmwqhuv@earth> Message-ID: To: cocci@systeme.lip6.fr List-Id: cocci@systeme.lip6.fr Hi Julia, checking back... On Tue, Sep 5, 2017 at 1:14 PM, Julia Lawall wrote: > > > On Tue, 5 Sep 2017, Liam Breck wrote: > >> Hi Julia, any luck on this? > > I was trying to improve the parser, but it seems that my improvements > don't have a sufficient effect so I will try your suggestion of just > seding out the offending code. > > julia > >> >> On Thu, Aug 31, 2017 at 4:43 AM, Liam Breck wrote: >> > On Thu, Aug 31, 2017 at 4:33 AM, Julia Lawall wrote: >> >> >> >> >> >> On Thu, 31 Aug 2017, Liam Breck wrote: >> >> >> >>> On Thu, Aug 31, 2017 at 2:54 AM, Julia Lawall wrote: >> >>> > >> >>> > >> >>> > On Tue, 29 Aug 2017, Liam Breck wrote: >> >>> > >> >>> >> Coccinelle folks, >> >>> >> >> >>> >> On Tue, Aug 29, 2017 at 5:29 PM, Sebastian Reichel >> >>> >> wrote: >> >>> >> > Hi, >> >>> >> > >> >>> >> > On Tue, Aug 29, 2017 at 04:07:12PM -0700, Liam Breck wrote: >> >>> >> >> I don't see a Julia in CC list... >> >>> >> > >> >>> >> > <_< let's try that again. >> >>> >> > >> >>> >> >> On Tue, Aug 29, 2017 at 2:22 PM, Sebastian Reichel >> >>> >> >> wrote: >> >>> >> >> > [adding Julia to Cc for Coccinelle question] >> >>> >> >> > >> >>> >> >> > Hi, >> >>> >> >> > >> >>> >> >> > On Tue, Aug 29, 2017 at 10:31:57AM -0500, Andrew F. Davis wrote: >> >>> >> >> >> On 08/29/2017 05:54 AM, Sebastian Reichel wrote: >> >>> >> >> >> > On Wed, Aug 23, 2017 at 08:36:12PM -0700, Liam Breck wrote: >> >>> >> >> >> >> Overview: >> >>> >> >> >> >> * Reorganizes chip data definitions >> >>> >> >> >> >> * Enables features landed in these patches: >> >>> >> >> >> >> dt-bindings: power: supply: bq27xxx: Add monitored-battery documentation >> >>> >> >> >> >> power: supply: bq27xxx: Add chip data memory read/write support >> >>> >> >> >> >> power: supply: bq27xxx: Add power_supply_battery_info support >> >>> >> >> >> >> * Supports the following chips (only BQ27425 is active) >> >>> >> >> >> >> BQ27500, 545, 425, 421, 441, 621 >> >>> >> >> >> >> >> >>> >> >> >> >> Changes in v3: >> >>> >> >> >> >> * BQ27425 tested; workaround minor chip bug >> >>> >> >> >> >> * Dropped driver_version >> >>> >> >> >> >> * Fixed dbg_dupes logic for .props & .dm_regs >> >>> >> >> >> >> * Dropped two props array dupes >> >>> >> >> >> >> >> >>> >> >> >> >> Changes in v2: >> >>> >> >> >> >> * Added di->opts flags for remaining chip features >> >>> >> >> >> >> * Commented out untested bq27xxx_dm_regs parameters >> >>> >> >> >> >> * Changed dbg_dupes to run only once >> >>> >> >> >> >> >> >>> >> >> >> >> Notes on v1: >> >>> >> >> >> >> * Not fully tested (hence RFC tag) >> >>> >> >> >> > >> >>> >> >> >> > Thanks, full series queued. >> >>> >> >> >> > >> >>> >> >> >> > -- Sebastian >> >>> >> >> >> >> >>> >> >> >> Anyway, I've not got the time to fight these changes anymore, but at >> >>> >> >> >> very least could you drop 4/5, it's static analysis code made into a >> >>> >> >> >> runtime check built into a kernel driver, if not at least add my >> >>> >> >> >> nacked-by. :) >> >>> >> >> > >> >>> >> >> > Since it's not critical at all and nobody depends on it, I dropped 4/5 >> >>> >> >> > for now. I agree, that checking it at runtime is not nice. On the other >> >>> >> >> > hand I do think a duplication check makes sense. Doing a static >> >>> >> >> > check should be possible, but I have no idea how to implement this >> >>> >> >> > (without much effort). I suspect Coccinelle can do it, so I added >> >>> >> >> > Julia. >> >>> >> >> > >> >>> >> >> > For reference this is the runtime check: >> >>> >> >> > https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/9918953/ >> >>> >> >> >>> >> The data structures being checked start here: >> >>> >> https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/sre/linux-power-supply.git/tree/drivers/power/supply/bq27xxx_battery.c?h=for-next#n138 >> >>> >> >> >>> >> And are aggregated here: >> >>> >> https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/sre/linux-power-supply.git/tree/drivers/power/supply/bq27xxx_battery.c?h=for-next#n743 >> >>> > >> >>> > I worked a bit on this, but unfortunately there is a major parsing >> >>> > problem, and most of the definitions are ignored. Specifically, the >> >>> > definitions of the regs variables are interspersed with eg: >> >>> > >> >>> > #define bq27510g1_regs bq27500_regs >> >>> >> >>> You can transform the macros with sed to either of: >> >>> >> >>> static u8 *bq27510g1_regs = 0 // skip comparison if x == 0 >> >>> >> >>> static u8 bq27510g1_regs[BQ27XXX_REG_MAX] = { 0xFF } // skip >> >>> comparison if x[0] == 0xff >> >>> >> >>> Does that help? >> >> >> >> Not quite, because it's really a list of variable declarations, like >> >> >> >> int a, b, c, d; >> >> >> >> The following could be fine: >> >> >> >> *bq27510g1_regs = 0, >> > >> > i forgot about the static u8 at the top of the array set. But yes, >> > just drop static u8 from either of the alternatives I gave. >>