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=-1.0 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham 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 184B8C43381 for ; Sun, 17 Feb 2019 11:48:06 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DC0B52192C for ; Sun, 17 Feb 2019 11:48:05 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1728597AbfBQLsE (ORCPT ); Sun, 17 Feb 2019 06:48:04 -0500 Received: from mail2-relais-roc.national.inria.fr ([192.134.164.83]:21655 "EHLO mail2-relais-roc.national.inria.fr" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1725795AbfBQLsE (ORCPT ); Sun, 17 Feb 2019 06:48:04 -0500 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.58,380,1544482800"; d="scan'208";a="369731760" Received: from abo-58-107-68.mrs.modulonet.fr (HELO hadrien) ([85.68.107.58]) by mail2-relais-roc.national.inria.fr with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 17 Feb 2019 12:48:02 +0100 Date: Sun, 17 Feb 2019 12:48:02 +0100 (CET) From: Julia Lawall X-X-Sender: jll@hadrien To: Markus Elfring cc: Wen Yang , Gilles Muller , Nicolas Palix , Michal Marek , Masahiro Yamada , Wen Yang , Cheng Shengyu , kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org, LKML , Coccinelle Subject: Re: [PATCH v6] coccinelle: semantic code search for missing put_device() In-Reply-To: <1c152067-0135-79d7-1285-4bb9925054c8@web.de> Message-ID: References: <8e7ba7c0-b7fe-a1f0-d28b-0c716ecbcfdb@web.de> <1c152067-0135-79d7-1285-4bb9925054c8@web.de> User-Agent: Alpine 2.21 (DEB 202 2017-01-01) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Sun, 17 Feb 2019, Markus Elfring wrote: > >>> +@search exists@ > >>> +local idexpression id; > >>> +expression x,e,e1; > >>> +position p1,p2; > >>> +type T,T1,T2; > >>> +@@ > >>> + > >>> +id = of_find_device_by_node@p1(x) > >>> +... when != e = id > >> > >> I suggest to increase your software development attention also for > >> another implementation detail. > >> Source code analysis triggers challenges for safe data flow handling. > >> the semantic patch language supports search specifications for > >> the exclusion of specific assignments. > >> > >> Does this SmPL code contain a questionable order for the source > >> and target metavariables? > >> Can the following variant be more appropriate? > >> > >> + ... when != id = e > > > > This is possible, but I think unlikely. > > Would you dare to interpret my update suggestion (reordering of two identifiers) > as a required SmPL script correction? I didn't suggest to reorder anything. Both are needed. And, no I don't consider it to be a required suggestion. In practice, reassigning such a variable is very unlikely. julia