Re: [Cocci] Checking the replacement of two specific function calls

[Markus Elfring <Markus.Elfring@web.de>]

>> static int rcar_i2c_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
>> {
>> 	struct rcar_i2c_priv *priv;
…
>> 	struct device *dev = &pdev->dev;
>> // deleted part
>> 	priv->res = platform_get_resource(pdev, IORESOURCE_MEM, 0);
>>
>> 	priv->io = devm_ioremap_resource(dev, priv->res);
…
>> }
…
> Probably Coccinelle is not able to determine that priv->res and priv->io
> are pointers, if you have not given it enough encouragement to look for
> header files to find the defintion of the type of the priv structure.

The system configuration might need another bit of fine-tuning for
my test approach.


> I don't think that there is any need for the * in the metavariable declaration.

I tried out to specify the desired change by a specification which
can be a bit more precise.


> If the various expressions are not pointers, the C compiler
> would have complained.

The omission of the asterisk did also not trigger a known patch
for the mentioned function implementation while patches are generated
for code variations from other source files as expected.

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