From: Markus Elfring <Markus.Elfring@web.de>
To: Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@lip6.fr>,
Wen Yang <yellowriver2010@hotmail.com>
Cc: Michal Marek <michal.lkml@markovi.net>,
kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org,
Nicolas Palix <nicolas.palix@imag.fr>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Coccinelle <cocci@systeme.lip6.fr>,
Cheng Shengyu <cheng.shengyu@zte.com.cn>,
Wen Yang <wen.yang99@zte.com.cn>
Subject: Re: [Cocci] [v6] coccinelle: semantic code search for missing put_device()
Date: Sun, 17 Feb 2019 13:20:51 +0100
Message-ID: <10836645-5b19-a748-56d7-c0572a76ab4d@web.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.2.21.1902171304520.2444@hadrien>
>> If you would insist on the specification of such an assignment exclusion
>> for a SmPL ellipsis:
>> Can we agree on a correct order?
>
> I don't get your point.
I propose to take another closer look at a bit of SmPL code.
> There is no correct order.
I have got an other software development view here.
> Each order expresses something different.
I agree to this information.
> The order that is currently in the semantic patch is the one
> that is more likely in practice.
Please check once more.
…
+@search exists@
+local idexpression id;
+expression x,e,e1;
+position p1,p2;
…
+@@
+
+id = of_find_device_by_node@p1(x)
+... when != e = id
…
Or:
…
+ ... when != id = e
…
Which SmPL specification will achieve the desired software behaviour?
Regards,
Markus
_______________________________________________
Cocci mailing list
Cocci@systeme.lip6.fr
https://systeme.lip6.fr/mailman/listinfo/cocci
next prev parent reply index
Thread overview: 25+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-02-16 16:05 [Cocci] [PATCH v6] " Wen Yang
2019-02-16 16:33 ` Julia Lawall
2019-02-16 18:39 ` [Cocci] [v6] " Markus Elfring
2019-02-17 2:32 ` [Cocci] 答复: " Wen Yang
2019-02-17 7:42 ` Markus Elfring
2019-02-17 9:50 ` [Cocci] [PATCH v6] " Markus Elfring
2019-02-17 11:37 ` Julia Lawall
2019-02-17 11:42 ` Markus Elfring
2019-02-17 11:48 ` Julia Lawall
2019-02-17 12:00 ` [Cocci] [v6] " Markus Elfring
2019-02-17 12:05 ` Julia Lawall
2019-02-17 12:20 ` Markus Elfring [this message]
2019-02-17 12:52 ` Julia Lawall
2019-02-17 13:14 ` Markus Elfring
2019-02-18 3:22 ` wen.yang99
2019-02-18 6:43 ` Julia Lawall
2019-02-18 8:19 ` Markus Elfring
2019-02-19 2:14 ` wen.yang99
2019-02-19 7:04 ` Julia Lawall
2019-02-19 8:12 ` Markus Elfring
2019-02-19 8:29 ` Markus Elfring
2019-02-19 9:09 ` wen.yang99
2019-02-19 9:30 ` Markus Elfring
2019-03-06 11:18 ` Markus Elfring
2019-02-18 21:40 ` Markus Elfring
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=10836645-5b19-a748-56d7-c0572a76ab4d@web.de \
--to=markus.elfring@web.de \
--cc=cheng.shengyu@zte.com.cn \
--cc=cocci@systeme.lip6.fr \
--cc=julia.lawall@lip6.fr \
--cc=kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=michal.lkml@markovi.net \
--cc=nicolas.palix@imag.fr \
--cc=wen.yang99@zte.com.cn \
--cc=yellowriver2010@hotmail.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Coccinelle Archive on lore.kernel.org
Archives are clonable:
git clone --mirror https://lore.kernel.org/cocci/0 cocci/git/0.git
# If you have public-inbox 1.1+ installed, you may
# initialize and index your mirror using the following commands:
public-inbox-init -V2 cocci cocci/ https://lore.kernel.org/cocci \
cocci@systeme.lip6.fr
public-inbox-index cocci
Example config snippet for mirrors
Newsgroup available over NNTP:
nntp://nntp.lore.kernel.org/fr.lip6.systeme.cocci
AGPL code for this site: git clone https://public-inbox.org/public-inbox.git