From: Markus Elfring <Markus.Elfring@web.de>
To: Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@inria.fr>,
Denis Efremov <efremov@linux.com>,
Coccinelle <cocci@systeme.lip6.fr>
Cc: Michal Marek <michal.lkml@markovi.net>,
Gilles Muller <Gilles.Muller@lip6.fr>,
Nicolas Palix <nicolas.palix@imag.fr>,
kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Alexander Popov <alex.popov@linux.com>
Subject: Re: [Cocci] [PATCH v8] coccinelle: api: add kfree_mismatch script
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 2020 12:56:18 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4952443.lvVLTPejtF@sonne> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.2.22.394.2010161202360.41305@hadrien>
> > How do you think about the possibility for any adjustments according to the order
> > of the mentioned function names in proposed disjunctions for the semantic patch language?
>
> Please think about this for 5 seconds. Maybe there are 2000 calls to
> these allocation functions, and maybe there are a million function calls
> in the files that contain these calls.
Would you become interested to check the usage statistics in more detail?
> Microscopically optimizing the treatment of 2000 calls is not going to do anything
> to help the overall runtime, which depends on matching all
> of the above function names against the one million overall calls.
I got an other software understanding for the evaluation characteristics
of discussed SmPL scripts.
> > Can any additional identifiers become relevant?
>
> If you have other names to suggest, please do. If you don't have other
> names to suggest, then please stop asking such rhetorical questions.
I suggest to look at further possibilities so that more function call combinations
can be checked automatically.
How do you think about approaches to determine relevant properties
in systematic ways (besides listing involved identifiers explicitly)?
Regards,
Markus
_______________________________________________
Cocci mailing list
Cocci@systeme.lip6.fr
https://systeme.lip6.fr/mailman/listinfo/cocci
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-10-17 16:46 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-10-16 9:46 [Cocci] [PATCH v8] coccinelle: api: add kfree_mismatch script Markus Elfring
2020-10-16 10:07 ` Julia Lawall
2020-10-16 10:56 ` Markus Elfring [this message]
2020-10-18 16:00 ` [Cocci] Determination of an usage statistic for memory allocation calls Markus Elfring
2020-10-18 16:20 ` Julia Lawall
2020-10-18 16:46 ` Markus Elfring
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2020-06-05 20:42 [Cocci] [PATCH] coccinelle: api: add kvfree script Denis Efremov
2020-10-16 8:54 ` [Cocci] [PATCH v8] coccinelle: api: add kfree_mismatch script Denis Efremov
2020-10-17 21:17 ` Julia Lawall
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=4952443.lvVLTPejtF@sonne \
--to=markus.elfring@web.de \
--cc=Gilles.Muller@lip6.fr \
--cc=alex.popov@linux.com \
--cc=cocci@systeme.lip6.fr \
--cc=efremov@linux.com \
--cc=julia.lawall@inria.fr \
--cc=kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=michal.lkml@markovi.net \
--cc=nicolas.palix@imag.fr \
/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
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).