From: Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@lip6.fr>
To: Markus Elfring <Markus.Elfring@web.de>
Cc: kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org,
Michal Marek <michal.lkml@markovi.net>,
Wen Yang <yellowriver2010@hotmail.com>,
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 13:05:57 +0100 (CET) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.21.1902171304520.2444@hadrien> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <782fd1c3-80ff-a296-b3a2-351257bb13b3@web.de>
On Sun, 17 Feb 2019, Markus Elfring wrote:
> >> Would you dare to interpret my update suggestion (reordering of two identifiers)
> >> as a required SmPL script correction?
> >
> > I didn't suggest to reorder anything.
>
> This is obvious according to your acknowledgement for the sixth version
> of this evolving SmPL script.
>
>
> > Both are needed.
>
> 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. There is no correct order. Each order expresses
something different. The order that is currently in the semantic patch is
the one that is more likely in practice.
julia
>
>
> > And, no I don't consider it to be a required suggestion.
>
> Have we got a different view about an implementation detail at this place?
>
>
> > In practice, reassigning such a variable is very unlikely.
>
> This can be.
>
> Regards,
> Markus
>
_______________________________________________
Cocci mailing list
Cocci@systeme.lip6.fr
https://systeme.lip6.fr/mailman/listinfo/cocci
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-02-17 12:06 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 25+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-02-16 16:05 [Cocci] [PATCH v6] coccinelle: semantic code search for missing put_device() 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 [this message]
2019-02-17 12:20 ` Markus Elfring
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=alpine.DEB.2.21.1902171304520.2444@hadrien \
--to=julia.lawall@lip6.fr \
--cc=Markus.Elfring@web.de \
--cc=cheng.shengyu@zte.com.cn \
--cc=cocci@systeme.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
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).