* Re: [Cocci] [v2 1/4] coccinelle: api: extend memdup_user transformation with GFP_USER [not found] <0b9f2c58-e124-22d2-d91d-62a6e831c880@web.de> @ 2020-07-18 6:45 ` Julia Lawall [not found] ` <fa0ec546-9aee-5c95-428c-a225a3521f6f@web.de> 2020-07-18 13:11 ` Denis Efremov 0 siblings, 2 replies; 4+ messages in thread From: Julia Lawall @ 2020-07-18 6:45 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Markus Elfring Cc: Michal Marek, Gilles Muller, kernel-janitors, Nicolas Palix, linux-kernel, Coccinelle On Sat, 18 Jul 2020, Markus Elfring wrote: > > Applied. > > Do you care for patch review concerns according to this SmPL script adjustment? > > * https://lore.kernel.org/cocci/5c0dae88-e172-3ba6-f86c-d1a6238bb4c4@web.de/ > https://lkml.org/lkml/2020/6/9/568 This one it complete nonsense. > > * https://lore.kernel.org/cocci/c3464cad-e567-9ef5-b4e3-a01e3b11120b@web.de/ > https://lkml.org/lkml/2020/6/8/637 This on is indeed a problem. I think it was not detected in testing, because in the current kernel the rule never applies. But Denis, in - to = \(kmalloc\|kzalloc\) (size,\(GFP_KERNEL\|GFP_USER\| \(GFP_KERNEL\|GFP_USER\)|__GFP_NOWARN\)); you do indeed need to put - in front of the second and third lines as well. Markus, if you would limit your comments to suggesting SmPL code that is actually correct, ie that you have tested, and 2) stop suggesting stupid things over and over like that putting all of the virtual declarations on the same line would save space (it does, but who cares), then I would take your suggestions more seriously. julia > Regards, > Markus > _______________________________________________ Cocci mailing list Cocci@systeme.lip6.fr https://systeme.lip6.fr/mailman/listinfo/cocci ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
[parent not found: <fa0ec546-9aee-5c95-428c-a225a3521f6f@web.de>]
* Re: [Cocci] [v2 1/4] coccinelle: api: extend memdup_user transformation with GFP_USER [not found] ` <fa0ec546-9aee-5c95-428c-a225a3521f6f@web.de> @ 2020-07-18 8:41 ` Julia Lawall 0 siblings, 0 replies; 4+ messages in thread From: Julia Lawall @ 2020-07-18 8:41 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Markus Elfring Cc: Michal Marek, Gilles Muller, kernel-janitors, Nicolas Palix, linux-kernel, Coccinelle [-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2365 bytes --] On Sat, 18 Jul 2020, Markus Elfring wrote: > >>> Applied. > >> > >> Do you care for patch review concerns according to this SmPL script adjustment? > >> > >> * https://lore.kernel.org/cocci/5c0dae88-e172-3ba6-f86c-d1a6238bb4c4@web.de/ > >> https://lkml.org/lkml/2020/6/9/568 > > > > This one it complete nonsense. > > I hope that different views can be clarified for such a software situation > in more constructive ways. You proposed essentially \( A \| B \) \( | C \| \) This is not valid syntax in the semantic patch language. The branches of a \( \| \) have to be a valid expression, statement, type, etc, not some random string of tokens. > >> * https://lore.kernel.org/cocci/c3464cad-e567-9ef5-b4e3-a01e3b11120b@web.de/ > >> https://lkml.org/lkml/2020/6/8/637 > > > > This on is indeed a problem. > > I find this feedback interesting. > > * How does it fit to your response “Applied”? > > * Will it trigger any more consequences? > > > > Markus, if you would limit your comments to suggesting SmPL code > > that is actually correct, ie that you have tested, > > Patch reviews contain usual risks that suggestions are presented > which can be still questionable. These are not "usual risks". You can easily test out your suggestion by yourself to see if it produces valid code. If it doesn't, then don't make the suggestion. > > > > and 2) stop suggesting stupid things over and over > > We come along different development views. Whenever you propose the same thing say 10 times or more and it is rejected every time, I thikn you should be able to conclude that if you propose the same thing again it will be rejected. > > > like that putting all of the virtual declarations on > > the same line would save space (it does, but who cares), > > It seems that you admit a possibly desirable effect. No, I don't consider the effect to be desirable. > Will any more developers care also for SmPL coding style aspects? > > > > then I would take your suggestions more seriously. > > Your change acceptance is varying to your development mood > (and other factors), isn't it? Not really. My "change acceptance" increases when the person reporting them raises real problems that is blocking them in some work. And it decreases rapidly when the changes are almost all related to presumed "efficiencies" that have no impact in practice. 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] 4+ messages in thread
* Re: [Cocci] [v2 1/4] coccinelle: api: extend memdup_user transformation with GFP_USER 2020-07-18 6:45 ` [Cocci] [v2 1/4] coccinelle: api: extend memdup_user transformation with GFP_USER Julia Lawall [not found] ` <fa0ec546-9aee-5c95-428c-a225a3521f6f@web.de> @ 2020-07-18 13:11 ` Denis Efremov 2020-07-18 13:29 ` Julia Lawall 1 sibling, 1 reply; 4+ messages in thread From: Denis Efremov @ 2020-07-18 13:11 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Julia Lawall, Markus Elfring; +Cc: Coccinelle, linux-kernel Hi, On 7/18/20 9:45 AM, Julia Lawall wrote: > This on is indeed a problem. I think it was not detected in testing, > because in the current kernel the rule never applies. But Denis, in > > - to = \(kmalloc\|kzalloc\) > (size,\(GFP_KERNEL\|GFP_USER\| > \(GFP_KERNEL\|GFP_USER\)|__GFP_NOWARN\)); > > you do indeed need to put - in front of the second and third lines as > well. Thanks, Markus, Julia. I will send v3. Julia, is it ok with you, if I will drop the last patch with "selfcheck" this time? Regards, Denis _______________________________________________ Cocci mailing list Cocci@systeme.lip6.fr https://systeme.lip6.fr/mailman/listinfo/cocci ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* Re: [Cocci] [v2 1/4] coccinelle: api: extend memdup_user transformation with GFP_USER 2020-07-18 13:11 ` Denis Efremov @ 2020-07-18 13:29 ` Julia Lawall 0 siblings, 0 replies; 4+ messages in thread From: Julia Lawall @ 2020-07-18 13:29 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Denis Efremov; +Cc: Markus Elfring, Coccinelle, linux-kernel On Sat, 18 Jul 2020, Denis Efremov wrote: > Hi, > > On 7/18/20 9:45 AM, Julia Lawall wrote: > > This on is indeed a problem. I think it was not detected in testing, > > because in the current kernel the rule never applies. But Denis, in > > > > - to = \(kmalloc\|kzalloc\) > > (size,\(GFP_KERNEL\|GFP_USER\| > > \(GFP_KERNEL\|GFP_USER\)|__GFP_NOWARN\)); > > > > you do indeed need to put - in front of the second and third lines as > > well. > > Thanks, Markus, Julia. I will send v3. Julia, is it ok with you, if I will > drop the last patch with "selfcheck" this time? That would be perfect, thanks. julia _______________________________________________ Cocci mailing list Cocci@systeme.lip6.fr https://systeme.lip6.fr/mailman/listinfo/cocci ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2020-07-18 13:30 UTC | newest] Thread overview: 4+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed) -- links below jump to the message on this page -- [not found] <0b9f2c58-e124-22d2-d91d-62a6e831c880@web.de> 2020-07-18 6:45 ` [Cocci] [v2 1/4] coccinelle: api: extend memdup_user transformation with GFP_USER Julia Lawall [not found] ` <fa0ec546-9aee-5c95-428c-a225a3521f6f@web.de> 2020-07-18 8:41 ` Julia Lawall 2020-07-18 13:11 ` Denis Efremov 2020-07-18 13:29 ` Julia Lawall
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).