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=-6.0 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,MENTIONS_GIT_HOSTING,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham 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 DC87DC43381 for ; Sat, 16 Feb 2019 08:09:38 +0000 (UTC) Received: from isis.lip6.fr (isis.lip6.fr [132.227.60.2]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7D64B222D7 for ; Sat, 16 Feb 2019 08:09:38 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 7D64B222D7 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=lip6.fr Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=cocci-bounces@systeme.lip6.fr Received: from systeme.lip6.fr (systeme.lip6.fr [132.227.104.7]) by isis.lip6.fr (8.15.2/lip6) with ESMTP id x1G89J6t009606 ; Sat, 16 Feb 2019 09:09:19 +0100 (CET) Received: from systeme.lip6.fr (systeme.lip6.fr [127.0.0.1]) by systeme.lip6.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2413776FA; Sat, 16 Feb 2019 09:09:19 +0100 (CET) Received: from isis.lip6.fr (isis.lip6.fr [132.227.60.2]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by systeme.lip6.fr (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 263F676F4 for ; Sat, 16 Feb 2019 09:09:17 +0100 (CET) Received: from mail3-relais-sop.national.inria.fr (mail3-relais-sop.national.inria.fr [192.134.164.104]) by isis.lip6.fr (8.15.2/lip6) with ESMTP id x1G89GYm029875 for ; Sat, 16 Feb 2019 09:09:16 +0100 (CET) X-pt: isis.lip6.fr X-Addr-Warning: ATTENTION - Votre correspondant a fourni une adresse d'enveloppe @lip6.fr, mais ce message ne provient pas de lip6.fr ! postmaster@lip6.fr. X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.58,375,1544482800"; d="scan'208";a="296375171" Received: from abo-58-107-68.mrs.modulonet.fr (HELO hadrien) ([85.68.107.58]) by mail3-relais-sop.national.inria.fr with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 16 Feb 2019 09:09:15 +0100 Date: Sat, 16 Feb 2019 09:09:14 +0100 (CET) From: Julia Lawall X-X-Sender: jll@hadrien To: wen.yang99@zte.com.cn In-Reply-To: <201902161529041506841@zte.com.cn> Message-ID: References: 1550217319-40418-1-git-send-email-wen.yang99@zte.com.cn, b2f195e8-c3a3-f876-a075-317bb33496c6@web.de <201902161529041506841@zte.com.cn> User-Agent: Alpine 2.21 (DEB 202 2017-01-01) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="8323329-938833334-1550304555=:3212" X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, Sender e-mail whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.4.3 (isis.lip6.fr [132.227.60.2]); Sat, 16 Feb 2019 09:09:19 +0100 (CET) X-Greylist: IP, sender and recipient auto-whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.4.3 (isis.lip6.fr [132.227.60.2]); Sat, 16 Feb 2019 09:09:16 +0100 (CET) X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.78 on 132.227.60.2 X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.78 on 132.227.60.2 Cc: wang.yi59@zte.com.cn, kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org, michal.lkml@markovi.net, yellowriver2010@hotmail.com, nicolas.palix@imag.fr, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, cheng.shengyu@zte.com.cn, cocci@systeme.lip6.fr Subject: Re: [Cocci] [v5] Coccinelle: semantic code search for missing put_device() X-BeenThere: cocci@systeme.lip6.fr X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: cocci-bounces@systeme.lip6.fr Errors-To: cocci-bounces@systeme.lip6.fr This message is in MIME format. The first part should be readable text, while the remaining parts are likely unreadable without MIME-aware tools. --8323329-938833334-1550304555=:3212 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT On Sat, 16 Feb 2019, wen.yang99@zte.com.cn wrote: > >>> Does the first SmPL when specification include the case that a call > >>> of the function “put_device” can occur within a branch of an if statement? > >> > >> It does include that, > > > >Thanks for this acknowledgement. > > > >So it seems that you find my interpretation of this bit of SmPL code appropriate. > > > >> but there is another execution path where the put device is not present. > > > >It is tried to find such cases. > > > >> But given the test in the if in the when code, > >> on that execution path id is NULL, an so there is no need to put it. > > > >I would like to point out that the function “put_device” belongs also to > >the category of functions which tolerate the passing of null pointers. > >https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/v5.0-rc6/source/drivers/base/core.c#L2053 > >https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/drivers/base/core.c?id=cb5b020a8d38f77209d0472a0fea755299a8ec78#n2053 > > > >Have we got still different software development opinions about the need > >for an extra pointer check in the “second” SmPL when specification? > > Thanks to Julia and Markus. > We will modify the the if in the when code like this: > > @@ -22,7 +22,7 @@ if (id == NULL || ...) { ... return ...; } > ... when != put_device(&id->dev) > when != platform_device_put(id) > when != of_dev_put(id) > - when != if (id) { ... put_device(&id->dev) ... } > + when != if (...) { ... put_device(&id->dev) ... } This looks ok. You can check the old version and the new version and see if there is any differencein the set of reports. julia --8323329-938833334-1550304555=:3212 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline _______________________________________________ Cocci mailing list Cocci@systeme.lip6.fr https://systeme.lip6.fr/mailman/listinfo/cocci --8323329-938833334-1550304555=:3212--