Coccinelle archive on lore.kernel.org
 help / color / Atom feed
From: Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@lip6.fr>
To: David Young <dyoung@netbsd.org>
Cc: cocci@systeme.lip6.fr
Subject: Re: [Cocci] continue statement of death?
Date: Thu, 12 Sep 2019 10:27:47 +0200 (CEST)
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.21.1909121027240.2876@hadrien> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190912015155.GE26691@pobox.com>



On Wed, 11 Sep 2019, David Young wrote:

> Today I built and installed Coccinelle 1.0.7 on NetBSD.
>
> I am processing this fragment of NetBSD kernel code, `tbr_timeout.c`,
>
> | /*
> |  * tbr_timeout goes through the interface list, and kicks the drivers
> |  * if necessary.
> |  */
> | static void
> | tbr_timeout(void *arg)
> | {
> |         struct ifnet *ifp;
> |         int active, s;
> |
> |         active = 0;
> |         s = splnet();
> |         for (ifp = TAILQ_FIRST(&ifnet); ifp; ifp = TAILQ_NEXT(ifp, if_list)) {
> |                 if (!TBR_IS_ENABLED(&ifp->if_snd))
> | #if 1
> |                         continue;
> | #endif
> |                 active++;
> |                 if (!IFQ_IS_EMPTY(&ifp->if_snd) && ifp->if_start != NULL)
> |                         (*ifp->if_start)(ifp);
> |         }
> |         splx(s);
> |         if (active > 0)
> |                 CALLOUT_RESET(&tbr_callout, 1, tbr_timeout, NULL);
> |         else
> |                 tbr_timer = 0;  /* don't need tbr_timer anymore */
> | }
> |
>
> using this semantic patch, `tailq.spatch`,
>
> | @@
> | identifier I, N;
> | expression H;
> | statement S;
> | iterator name TAILQ_FOREACH;
> | @@
> |
> | - for (I = TAILQ_FIRST(H); I != NULL; I = TAILQ_NEXT(I, N)) S
> | + TAILQ_FOREACH(I, H, N) S
>
> I find that if the condition in the `#if` directive is 1, then `spatch
> --sp-file tailq.spatch -o tbr_timeout.spatch tbr_timeout.c` runs for
> a few minutes before running out of memory. `spatch` prints this
> mysterious message when it starts:
>
>      (ONCE) already tagged but only removed, so safe
>
> If I turn the condition to 0, however, spatch instantaneously prints the
> result with the `for (...)` clause turned to `TAILQ_FOREACH(...)`, as
> expected.  I don't see the mysterious `(ONCE) ...` message.
>
> Any ideas why `continue;` is troublesome to spatch?

I'm looking into it.  It seems to be a pretty printing problem.

julia
_______________________________________________
Cocci mailing list
Cocci@systeme.lip6.fr
https://systeme.lip6.fr/mailman/listinfo/cocci

  reply index

Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2019-09-12  1:51 David Young
2019-09-12  8:27 ` Julia Lawall [this message]
2019-09-12 13:37 ` Markus Elfring
2019-09-12 14:49   ` David Young
2019-09-12 14:51   ` Julia Lawall

Reply instructions:

You may reply publically 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.2.21.1909121027240.2876@hadrien \
    --to=julia.lawall@lip6.fr \
    --cc=cocci@systeme.lip6.fr \
    --cc=dyoung@netbsd.org \
    /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 cocci@archiver.kernel.org
	public-inbox-index cocci


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