Coccinelle archive on lore.kernel.org
 help / color / Atom feed
* [Cocci] [PATCH v3] coccinelle: semantic patch to check for inappropriate do_div() calls
@ 2020-01-10 13:15 Wen Yang
  2020-01-10 16:35 ` Markus Elfring
                   ` (2 more replies)
  0 siblings, 3 replies; 10+ messages in thread
From: Wen Yang @ 2020-01-10 13:15 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Julia Lawall
  Cc: Michal Marek, Wen Yang, Gilles Muller, Nicolas Palix,
	Matthias Maennich, linux-kernel, Greg Kroah-Hartman,
	Thomas Gleixner, cocci

do_div() does a 64-by-32 division.
When the divisor is unsigned long, u64, or s64,
do_div() truncates it to 32 bits, this means it
can test non-zero and be truncated to zero for division.
This semantic patch is inspired by Mateusz Guzik's patch:
commit b0ab99e7736a ("sched: Fix possible divide by zero in avg_atom() calculation")

Signed-off-by: Wen Yang <wenyang@linux.alibaba.com>
Cc: Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@inria.fr>
Cc: Gilles Muller <Gilles.Muller@lip6.fr>
Cc: Nicolas Palix <nicolas.palix@imag.fr>
Cc: Michal Marek <michal.lkml@markovi.net>
Cc: Matthias Maennich <maennich@google.com>
Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
Cc: Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@socionext.com>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Cc: cocci@systeme.lip6.fr
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
---
v3:
- also filter out safe consts for context mode.
- cleanup code.

v2:
- add a special case for constants and checking whether the value is obviously safe and no warning is needed.
- fix 'WARNING:' twice in each case.
- extend the warning to say "consider using div64_xxx instead".

 scripts/coccinelle/misc/do_div.cocci | 155 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++
 1 file changed, 155 insertions(+)
 create mode 100644 scripts/coccinelle/misc/do_div.cocci

diff --git a/scripts/coccinelle/misc/do_div.cocci b/scripts/coccinelle/misc/do_div.cocci
new file mode 100644
index 000000000000..79db083c5208
--- /dev/null
+++ b/scripts/coccinelle/misc/do_div.cocci
@@ -0,0 +1,155 @@
+// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0-only
+/// do_div() does a 64-by-32 division.
+/// When the divisor is long, unsigned long, u64, or s64,
+/// do_div() truncates it to 32 bits, this means it can test
+/// non-zero and be truncated to 0 for division on 64bit platforms.
+///
+//# This makes an effort to find those inappropriate do_div() calls.
+//
+// Confidence: Moderate
+// Copyright: (C) 2020 Wen Yang, Alibaba.
+// Comments:
+// Options: --no-includes --include-headers
+
+virtual context
+virtual org
+virtual report
+
+@initialize:python@
+@@
+
+def get_digit_type_and_value(str):
+    is_digit = False
+    value = 0
+
+    try:
+        if (str.isdigit()):
+           is_digit = True
+           value =  int(str, 0)
+        elif (str.upper().endswith('ULL')):
+           is_digit = True
+           value = int(str[:-3], 0)
+        elif (str.upper().endswith('LL')):
+           is_digit = True
+           value = int(str[:-2], 0)
+        elif (str.upper().endswith('UL')):
+           is_digit = True
+           value = int(str[:-2], 0)
+        elif (str.upper().endswith('L')):
+           is_digit = True
+           value = int(str[:-1], 0)
+        elif (str.upper().endswith('U')):
+           is_digit = True
+           value = int(str[:-1], 0)
+    except Exception as e:
+          print('Error:',e)
+          is_digit = False
+          value = 0
+    finally:
+        return is_digit, value
+
+def filter_out_safe_constants(str):
+    is_digit, value = get_digit_type_and_value(str)
+    if (is_digit):
+        if (value >= 0x100000000):
+            return True
+        else:
+            return False
+    else:
+        return True
+
+def construct_warnings(suggested_fun):
+    msg="WARNING: do_div() does a 64-by-32 division, please consider using %s instead."
+    return  msg % suggested_fun
+
+@depends on context@
+expression f;
+long l: script:python() { filter_out_safe_constants(l) };
+unsigned long ul : script:python() { filter_out_safe_constants(ul) };
+u64 ul64 : script:python() { filter_out_safe_constants(ul64) };
+s64 sl64 : script:python() { filter_out_safe_constants(sl64) };
+
+@@
+(
+* do_div(f, l);
+|
+* do_div(f, ul);
+|
+* do_div(f, ul64);
+|
+* do_div(f, sl64);
+)
+
+@r depends on (org || report)@
+expression f;
+position p;
+long l: script:python() { filter_out_safe_constants(l) };
+unsigned long ul : script:python() { filter_out_safe_constants(ul) };
+u64 ul64 : script:python() { filter_out_safe_constants(ul64) };
+s64 sl64 : script:python() { filter_out_safe_constants(sl64) };
+@@
+(
+do_div@p(f, l);
+|
+do_div@p(f, ul);
+|
+do_div@p(f, ul64);
+|
+do_div@p(f, sl64);
+)
+
+@script:python depends on org@
+p << r.p;
+ul << r.ul;
+@@
+
+coccilib.org.print_todo(p[0], construct_warnings("div64_ul"))
+
+@script:python depends on org@
+p << r.p;
+l << r.l;
+@@
+
+coccilib.org.print_todo(p[0], construct_warnings("div64_long"))
+
+@script:python depends on org@
+p << r.p;
+ul64 << r.ul64;
+@@
+
+coccilib.org.print_todo(p[0], construct_warnings("div64_u64"))
+
+@script:python depends on org@
+p << r.p;
+sl64 << r.sl64;
+@@
+
+coccilib.org.print_todo(p[0], construct_warnings("div64_s64"))
+
+@script:python depends on report@
+p << r.p;
+ul << r.ul;
+@@
+
+coccilib.report.print_report(p[0], construct_warnings("div64_ul"))
+
+@script:python depends on report@
+p << r.p;
+l << r.l;
+@@
+
+coccilib.report.print_report(p[0], construct_warnings("div64_long"))
+
+@script:python depends on report@
+p << r.p;
+sl64 << r.sl64;
+@@
+
+coccilib.report.print_report(p[0], construct_warnings("div64_s64"))
+
+@script:python depends on report@
+p << r.p;
+ul64 << r.ul64;
+@@
+
+coccilib.report.print_report(p[0], construct_warnings("div64_u64"))
-- 
2.23.0

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

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread

* Re: [Cocci] [PATCH v3] coccinelle: semantic patch to check for inappropriate do_div() calls
  2020-01-10 13:15 [Cocci] [PATCH v3] coccinelle: semantic patch to check for inappropriate do_div() calls Wen Yang
@ 2020-01-10 16:35 ` Markus Elfring
  2020-01-11  5:06   ` Wen Yang
  2020-01-11 15:36 ` [Cocci] [PATCH v3] " Julia Lawall
  2020-01-12  8:30 ` Markus Elfring
  2 siblings, 1 reply; 10+ messages in thread
From: Markus Elfring @ 2020-01-10 16:35 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Wen Yang, cocci, kernel-janitors
  Cc: Michal Marek, Julia Lawall, Greg Kroah-Hartman, Nicolas Palix,
	Gilles Muller, Matthias Männich, linux-kernel,
	Thomas Gleixner

> +@initialize:python@
> +def filter_out_safe_constants(str):
> +def construct_warnings(str, suggested_fun):

* I suggest once more to adjust the dependency specifications for the usage
  of these functions by SmPL rules.

* Can the local variable “msg” be omitted?


> +coccilib.org.print_todo(p[0], construct_warnings("div64_ul"))

I suggest again to move the prefix “div64_” into the string literal
of the function implementation.


The SmPL code for two disjunctions could become shorter.

Regards,
Markus
_______________________________________________
Cocci mailing list
Cocci@systeme.lip6.fr
https://systeme.lip6.fr/mailman/listinfo/cocci

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread

* Re: [Cocci] [PATCH v3] coccinelle: semantic patch to check for inappropriate do_div() calls
  2020-01-10 16:35 ` Markus Elfring
@ 2020-01-11  5:06   ` Wen Yang
  2020-01-11  7:30     ` [Cocci] [v3] " Markus Elfring
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 10+ messages in thread
From: Wen Yang @ 2020-01-11  5:06 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Markus Elfring, cocci, kernel-janitors
  Cc: Michal Marek, Julia Lawall, Greg Kroah-Hartman, Nicolas Palix,
	Gilles Muller, Matthias Männich, linux-kernel,
	Thomas Gleixner



On 2020/1/11 12:35 上午, Markus Elfring wrote:
>> +@initialize:python@
> …
>> +def filter_out_safe_constants(str):
> …
>> +def construct_warnings(str, suggested_fun):
> 
> * I suggest once more to adjust the dependency specifications for the usage
>    of these functions by SmPL rules.
> 

Most of the functions here are for all operation modes.


> * Can the local variable “msg” be omitted?
> 
> 
>> +coccilib.org.print_todo(p[0], construct_warnings("div64_ul"))
> 
> I suggest again to move the prefix “div64_” into the string literal
> of the function implementation.
> 

“div64_ul” indicates the function name we recommend.
As shown in the patch:

+def construct_warnings(suggested_fun):
+    msg="WARNING: do_div() does a 64-by-32 division, please consider 
using %s instead."
+    return  msg % suggested_fun
...
+coccilib.org.print_todo(p[0], construct_warnings("div64_ul"))

If we delete the prefix "div64_", it may reduce readability.

> 
> The SmPL code for two disjunctions could become shorter.
> 

You may suggest to modify it as follows:
+@@
+*do_div(f, \( l \| ul \| ul64 \| sl64 \) );

We agree with Julia:
I don't se any point to this.  The code matched will be the same in both
cases.  The original code is quite readable, without the ugly \( etc.

--
Regards,
Wen

> Regards,
> Markus
> 
_______________________________________________
Cocci mailing list
Cocci@systeme.lip6.fr
https://systeme.lip6.fr/mailman/listinfo/cocci

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread

* Re: [Cocci] [v3] coccinelle: semantic patch to check for inappropriate do_div() calls
  2020-01-11  5:06   ` Wen Yang
@ 2020-01-11  7:30     ` " Markus Elfring
  2020-01-11  7:44       ` Julia Lawall
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 10+ messages in thread
From: Markus Elfring @ 2020-01-11  7:30 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Wen Yang, cocci, kernel-janitors
  Cc: Michal Marek, Julia Lawall, Greg Kroah-Hartman, Nicolas Palix,
	Gilles Muller, Matthias Männich, linux-kernel,
	Thomas Gleixner

>> * I suggest once more to adjust the dependency specifications for the usage
>>   of these functions by SmPL rules.
>
> Most of the functions here are for all operation modes.

I got an other understanding for this software.

You added the information “also filter out safe consts for context mode”
to the patch change log.


>> * Can the local variable “msg” be omitted?

I would appreciate another fine-tuning also at this place.


>>> +coccilib.org.print_todo(p[0], construct_warnings("div64_ul"))
>>
>> I suggest again to move the prefix “div64_” into the string literal
>> of the function implementation.
>
> “div64_ul” indicates the function name we recommend.

The intention can be fine.


> If we delete the prefix "div64_",

I suggest to use the text at an other place.


> it may reduce readability.

I find an other code variant also readable good enough.


> +*do_div(f, \( l \| ul \| ul64 \| sl64 \) );
>
> We agree with Julia:
> I don't se any point to this.

Can the avoidance of duplicate source code (according to SmPL disjunctions)
trigger positive effects on run time characteristics and software maintenance?

Regards,
Markus
_______________________________________________
Cocci mailing list
Cocci@systeme.lip6.fr
https://systeme.lip6.fr/mailman/listinfo/cocci

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread

* Re: [Cocci] [v3] coccinelle: semantic patch to check for inappropriate do_div() calls
  2020-01-11  7:30     ` [Cocci] [v3] " Markus Elfring
@ 2020-01-11  7:44       ` Julia Lawall
  2020-01-11  8:03         ` Markus Elfring
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 10+ messages in thread
From: Julia Lawall @ 2020-01-11  7:44 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Markus Elfring
  Cc: Michal Marek, Wen Yang, Gilles Muller, Greg Kroah-Hartman,
	Nicolas Palix, kernel-janitors, linux-kernel,
	Matthias Männich, Thomas Gleixner, cocci

> > +*do_div(f, \( l \| ul \| ul64 \| sl64 \) );
> >
> > We agree with Julia:
> > I don't se any point to this.
>
> Can the avoidance of duplicate source code (according to SmPL disjunctions)
> trigger positive effects on run time characteristics and software maintenance?

Markus.  Please stop asking this question.  You are bothering people with
this advice, why don't _you_ figure out once and for all whether the change
that you suggest has any "positive effects on the run time
characteristics"?  Hint: it will not. You don't even have to run Coccinelle
to see that.  Just use spatch --parse-cocci on your two suggestions and you
will see that they expand to the same thing.  Coccinelle has a pass that
propagates disjunctions at the sub-statement level to the statement level.

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

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread

* Re: [Cocci] [v3] coccinelle: semantic patch to check for inappropriate do_div() calls
  2020-01-11  7:44       ` Julia Lawall
@ 2020-01-11  8:03         ` Markus Elfring
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 10+ messages in thread
From: Markus Elfring @ 2020-01-11  8:03 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Julia Lawall, Wen Yang, cocci
  Cc: kernel-janitors, Michal Marek, Gilles Muller, Greg Kroah-Hartman,
	Nicolas Palix, Matthias Männich, linux-kernel,
	Thomas Gleixner

>> Can the avoidance of duplicate source code (according to SmPL disjunctions)
>> trigger positive effects on run time characteristics and software maintenance?
>
> Markus.  Please stop asking this question.

This will not happen for a while.


> You are bothering people with this advice,

I present just another view.


> why don't _you_ figure out once and for all whether the change
> that you suggest has any "positive effects on the run time characteristics"?
> Hint: it will not.

* How much attention do you give to the software development principle
  "Don't repeat yourself"?

* Can the file size of a SmPL script matter a bit?


> Coccinelle has a pass that propagates disjunctions at the sub-statement level
> to the statement level.

This data processing can probably trigger further development considerations.

Regards,
Markus
_______________________________________________
Cocci mailing list
Cocci@systeme.lip6.fr
https://systeme.lip6.fr/mailman/listinfo/cocci

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread

* Re: [Cocci] [PATCH v3] coccinelle: semantic patch to check for inappropriate do_div() calls
  2020-01-10 13:15 [Cocci] [PATCH v3] coccinelle: semantic patch to check for inappropriate do_div() calls Wen Yang
  2020-01-10 16:35 ` Markus Elfring
@ 2020-01-11 15:36 ` " Julia Lawall
  2020-01-12  8:30 ` Markus Elfring
  2 siblings, 0 replies; 10+ messages in thread
From: Julia Lawall @ 2020-01-11 15:36 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Wen Yang
  Cc: Michal Marek, Gilles Muller, Nicolas Palix, Matthias Maennich,
	linux-kernel, Greg Kroah-Hartman, Thomas Gleixner, cocci


On Fri, 10 Jan 2020, Wen Yang wrote:

> do_div() does a 64-by-32 division.
> When the divisor is unsigned long, u64, or s64,
> do_div() truncates it to 32 bits, this means it
> can test non-zero and be truncated to zero for division.
> This semantic patch is inspired by Mateusz Guzik's patch:
> commit b0ab99e7736a ("sched: Fix possible divide by zero in avg_atom() calculation")
>
> Signed-off-by: Wen Yang <wenyang@linux.alibaba.com>

Acked-by: Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@inria.fr>

This looks good to me.

A small detail is that you don't need the parentheses in:

@r depends on (org || report)@

julia

> Cc: Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@inria.fr>
> Cc: Gilles Muller <Gilles.Muller@lip6.fr>
> Cc: Nicolas Palix <nicolas.palix@imag.fr>
> Cc: Michal Marek <michal.lkml@markovi.net>
> Cc: Matthias Maennich <maennich@google.com>
> Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
> Cc: Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@socionext.com>
> Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
> Cc: cocci@systeme.lip6.fr
> Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
> ---
> v3:
> - also filter out safe consts for context mode.
> - cleanup code.
>
> v2:
> - add a special case for constants and checking whether the value is obviously safe and no warning is needed.
> - fix 'WARNING:' twice in each case.
> - extend the warning to say "consider using div64_xxx instead".
>
>  scripts/coccinelle/misc/do_div.cocci | 155 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>  1 file changed, 155 insertions(+)
>  create mode 100644 scripts/coccinelle/misc/do_div.cocci
>
> diff --git a/scripts/coccinelle/misc/do_div.cocci b/scripts/coccinelle/misc/do_div.cocci
> new file mode 100644
> index 000000000000..79db083c5208
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/scripts/coccinelle/misc/do_div.cocci
> @@ -0,0 +1,155 @@
> +// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0-only
> +/// do_div() does a 64-by-32 division.
> +/// When the divisor is long, unsigned long, u64, or s64,
> +/// do_div() truncates it to 32 bits, this means it can test
> +/// non-zero and be truncated to 0 for division on 64bit platforms.
> +///
> +//# This makes an effort to find those inappropriate do_div() calls.
> +//
> +// Confidence: Moderate
> +// Copyright: (C) 2020 Wen Yang, Alibaba.
> +// Comments:
> +// Options: --no-includes --include-headers
> +
> +virtual context
> +virtual org
> +virtual report
> +
> +@initialize:python@
> +@@
> +
> +def get_digit_type_and_value(str):
> +    is_digit = False
> +    value = 0
> +
> +    try:
> +        if (str.isdigit()):
> +           is_digit = True
> +           value =  int(str, 0)
> +        elif (str.upper().endswith('ULL')):
> +           is_digit = True
> +           value = int(str[:-3], 0)
> +        elif (str.upper().endswith('LL')):
> +           is_digit = True
> +           value = int(str[:-2], 0)
> +        elif (str.upper().endswith('UL')):
> +           is_digit = True
> +           value = int(str[:-2], 0)
> +        elif (str.upper().endswith('L')):
> +           is_digit = True
> +           value = int(str[:-1], 0)
> +        elif (str.upper().endswith('U')):
> +           is_digit = True
> +           value = int(str[:-1], 0)
> +    except Exception as e:
> +          print('Error:',e)
> +          is_digit = False
> +          value = 0
> +    finally:
> +        return is_digit, value
> +
> +def filter_out_safe_constants(str):
> +    is_digit, value = get_digit_type_and_value(str)
> +    if (is_digit):
> +        if (value >= 0x100000000):
> +            return True
> +        else:
> +            return False
> +    else:
> +        return True
> +
> +def construct_warnings(suggested_fun):
> +    msg="WARNING: do_div() does a 64-by-32 division, please consider using %s instead."
> +    return  msg % suggested_fun
> +
> +@depends on context@
> +expression f;
> +long l: script:python() { filter_out_safe_constants(l) };
> +unsigned long ul : script:python() { filter_out_safe_constants(ul) };
> +u64 ul64 : script:python() { filter_out_safe_constants(ul64) };
> +s64 sl64 : script:python() { filter_out_safe_constants(sl64) };
> +
> +@@
> +(
> +* do_div(f, l);
> +|
> +* do_div(f, ul);
> +|
> +* do_div(f, ul64);
> +|
> +* do_div(f, sl64);
> +)
> +
> +@r depends on (org || report)@
> +expression f;
> +position p;
> +long l: script:python() { filter_out_safe_constants(l) };
> +unsigned long ul : script:python() { filter_out_safe_constants(ul) };
> +u64 ul64 : script:python() { filter_out_safe_constants(ul64) };
> +s64 sl64 : script:python() { filter_out_safe_constants(sl64) };
> +@@
> +(
> +do_div@p(f, l);
> +|
> +do_div@p(f, ul);
> +|
> +do_div@p(f, ul64);
> +|
> +do_div@p(f, sl64);
> +)
> +
> +@script:python depends on org@
> +p << r.p;
> +ul << r.ul;
> +@@
> +
> +coccilib.org.print_todo(p[0], construct_warnings("div64_ul"))
> +
> +@script:python depends on org@
> +p << r.p;
> +l << r.l;
> +@@
> +
> +coccilib.org.print_todo(p[0], construct_warnings("div64_long"))
> +
> +@script:python depends on org@
> +p << r.p;
> +ul64 << r.ul64;
> +@@
> +
> +coccilib.org.print_todo(p[0], construct_warnings("div64_u64"))
> +
> +@script:python depends on org@
> +p << r.p;
> +sl64 << r.sl64;
> +@@
> +
> +coccilib.org.print_todo(p[0], construct_warnings("div64_s64"))
> +
> +@script:python depends on report@
> +p << r.p;
> +ul << r.ul;
> +@@
> +
> +coccilib.report.print_report(p[0], construct_warnings("div64_ul"))
> +
> +@script:python depends on report@
> +p << r.p;
> +l << r.l;
> +@@
> +
> +coccilib.report.print_report(p[0], construct_warnings("div64_long"))
> +
> +@script:python depends on report@
> +p << r.p;
> +sl64 << r.sl64;
> +@@
> +
> +coccilib.report.print_report(p[0], construct_warnings("div64_s64"))
> +
> +@script:python depends on report@
> +p << r.p;
> +ul64 << r.ul64;
> +@@
> +
> +coccilib.report.print_report(p[0], construct_warnings("div64_u64"))
> --
> 2.23.0
>
>
_______________________________________________
Cocci mailing list
Cocci@systeme.lip6.fr
https://systeme.lip6.fr/mailman/listinfo/cocci

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread

* Re: [Cocci] [PATCH v3] coccinelle: semantic patch to check for inappropriate do_div() calls
  2020-01-10 13:15 [Cocci] [PATCH v3] coccinelle: semantic patch to check for inappropriate do_div() calls Wen Yang
  2020-01-10 16:35 ` Markus Elfring
  2020-01-11 15:36 ` [Cocci] [PATCH v3] " Julia Lawall
@ 2020-01-12  8:30 ` Markus Elfring
  2020-01-12  8:42   ` Julia Lawall
  2 siblings, 1 reply; 10+ messages in thread
From: Markus Elfring @ 2020-01-12  8:30 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Wen Yang, cocci
  Cc: Michal Marek, Julia Lawall, Greg Kroah-Hartman, Nicolas Palix,
	Gilles Muller, kernel-janitors, linux-kernel,
	Matthias Männich, Thomas Gleixner

> This semantic patch is inspired by Mateusz Guzik's patch:

Does such a wording mean also that you would like to support the operation mode “patch”
by this SmPL script?

Regards,
Markus
_______________________________________________
Cocci mailing list
Cocci@systeme.lip6.fr
https://systeme.lip6.fr/mailman/listinfo/cocci

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread

* Re: [Cocci] [PATCH v3] coccinelle: semantic patch to check for inappropriate do_div() calls
  2020-01-12  8:30 ` Markus Elfring
@ 2020-01-12  8:42   ` Julia Lawall
  2020-01-12  8:49     ` [Cocci] [v3] " Markus Elfring
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 10+ messages in thread
From: Julia Lawall @ 2020-01-12  8:42 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Markus Elfring
  Cc: Michal Marek, Wen Yang, Gilles Muller, Greg Kroah-Hartman,
	Nicolas Palix, kernel-janitors, linux-kernel,
	Matthias Männich, Thomas Gleixner, cocci

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 294 bytes --]


On Sun, 12 Jan 2020, Markus Elfring wrote:

> > This semantic patch is inspired by Mateusz Guzik's patch:
>
> Does such a wording mean also that you would like to support the operation mode “patch”
> by this SmPL script?

I see no reason why such a wording would imply such a thing.

julia

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 136 bytes --]

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

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread

* Re: [Cocci] [v3] coccinelle: semantic patch to check for inappropriate do_div() calls
  2020-01-12  8:42   ` Julia Lawall
@ 2020-01-12  8:49     ` " Markus Elfring
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 10+ messages in thread
From: Markus Elfring @ 2020-01-12  8:49 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Julia Lawall, Wen Yang, cocci
  Cc: kernel-janitors, Michal Marek, Gilles Muller, Greg Kroah-Hartman,
	Nicolas Palix, Matthias Männich, linux-kernel,
	Thomas Gleixner

> I see no reason why such a wording would imply such a thing.

Thus I suggest once more to improve the distinction between patching
and the description of source code searches in the commit message.

Regards,
Markus
_______________________________________________
Cocci mailing list
Cocci@systeme.lip6.fr
https://systeme.lip6.fr/mailman/listinfo/cocci

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread

end of thread, back to index

Thread overview: 10+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2020-01-10 13:15 [Cocci] [PATCH v3] coccinelle: semantic patch to check for inappropriate do_div() calls Wen Yang
2020-01-10 16:35 ` Markus Elfring
2020-01-11  5:06   ` Wen Yang
2020-01-11  7:30     ` [Cocci] [v3] " Markus Elfring
2020-01-11  7:44       ` Julia Lawall
2020-01-11  8:03         ` Markus Elfring
2020-01-11 15:36 ` [Cocci] [PATCH v3] " Julia Lawall
2020-01-12  8:30 ` Markus Elfring
2020-01-12  8:42   ` Julia Lawall
2020-01-12  8:49     ` [Cocci] [v3] " Markus Elfring

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
	public-inbox-index cocci

Example config snippet for mirrors

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.git