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=-2.2 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no 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 C0575C4321A for ; Fri, 28 Jun 2019 11:08:13 +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 20FD9204FD for ; Fri, 28 Jun 2019 11:08:12 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 20FD9204FD 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 (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id x5SB7sr6002078; Fri, 28 Jun 2019 13:07:54 +0200 (CEST) Received: from systeme.lip6.fr (systeme.lip6.fr [127.0.0.1]) by systeme.lip6.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id B1FF87782; Fri, 28 Jun 2019 13:07:54 +0200 (CEST) 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 F0D7A777B for ; Fri, 28 Jun 2019 13:07:52 +0200 (CEST) Received: from mail3-relais-sop.national.inria.fr (mail3-relais-sop.national.inria.fr [192.134.164.104]) by isis.lip6.fr (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id x5SB7p9Q002548 for ; Fri, 28 Jun 2019 13:07:52 +0200 (CEST) X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.63,427,1557180000"; d="scan'208";a="311767956" Received: from wifi-eduroam-85-160.paris.inria.fr ([128.93.85.160]) by mail3-relais-sop.national.inria.fr with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 28 Jun 2019 13:07:51 +0200 Date: Fri, 28 Jun 2019 13:07:51 +0200 (CEST) From: Julia Lawall X-X-Sender: jll@hadrien To: Markus Elfring In-Reply-To: <904b9362-cd01-ffc9-600b-0c48848617a0@web.de> Message-ID: References: <1561690732-20694-1-git-send-email-wen.yang99@zte.com.cn> <904b9362-cd01-ffc9-600b-0c48848617a0@web.de> User-Agent: Alpine 2.21 (DEB 202 2017-01-01) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="8323329-202224278-1561720071=:2538" X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, Sender e-mail whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.4.3 (isis.lip6.fr [132.227.60.2]); Fri, 28 Jun 2019 13:07:55 +0200 (CEST) X-Greylist: IP, sender and recipient auto-whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.4.3 (isis.lip6.fr [132.227.60.2]); Fri, 28 Jun 2019 13:07:52 +0200 (CEST) X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.78 on 132.227.60.2 X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.78 on 132.227.60.2 Cc: Yi Wang , Michal Marek , Nicolas Palix , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, cocci@systeme.lip6.fr, Wen Yang Subject: Re: [Cocci] [PATCH v2] coccinelle: semantic code search for missing of_node_put 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. --8323329-202224278-1561720071=:2538 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT > > +x = @p1\(of_find_all_nodes\| > > I would find this SmPL disjunction easier to read without the usage > of extra backslashes. > > +x = > +(of_… > +|of_… > +)@p1(...); Did you actually test this? I doubt that a position metavariable can be put on a ) of a disjunction. > > +| > > +return x; > > +| > > +return of_fwnode_handle(x); > > Can a nested SmPL disjunction be helpful at such places? > > +|return > +(x > +|of_fwnode_handle(x) > +); The original code is much more readable. The internal representation will be the same. > > + when != v4l2_async_notifier_add_fwnode_subdev(<...x...>) > > Would the specification variant “<+... x ...+>” be relevant > for the parameter selection? I'm indeed quite surprised that <...x...> would be accepted by the parser. julia --8323329-202224278-1561720071=:2538 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 --8323329-202224278-1561720071=:2538--