linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Markus Elfring <Markus.Elfring@web.de>
To: Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@lip6.fr>
Cc: Wen Yang <wen.yang99@zte.com.cn>,
	Gilles Muller <Gilles.Muller@lip6.fr>,
	Nicolas Palix <nicolas.palix@imag.fr>,
	Michal Marek <michal.lkml@markovi.net>,
	Yi Wang <wang.yi59@zte.com.cn>,
	Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@socionext.com>,
	Wen Yang <yellowriver2010@hotmail.com>,
	Cheng Shengyu <cheng.shengyu@zte.com.cn>,
	cocci@systeme.lip6.fr, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [v5] Coccinelle: semantic code search for missing put_device()
Date: Fri, 15 Feb 2019 14:54:27 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <b2f195e8-c3a3-f876-a075-317bb33496c6@web.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.2.20.1902151423370.3617@hadrien>

>> Does the first SmPL when specification include the case that a call
>> of the function “put_device” can occur within a branch of an if statement?
>
> It does include that,

Thanks for this acknowledgement.

So it seems that you find my interpretation of this bit of SmPL code appropriate.


> but there is another execution path where the put device is not present.

It is tried to find such cases.


> But given the test in the if in the when code,
> on that execution path id is NULL, an so there is no need to put it.

I would like to point out that the function “put_device” belongs also to
the category of functions which tolerate the passing of null pointers.
https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/v5.0-rc6/source/drivers/base/core.c#L2053
https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/drivers/base/core.c?id=cb5b020a8d38f77209d0472a0fea755299a8ec78#n2053

Have we got still different software development opinions about the need
for an extra pointer check in the “second” SmPL when specification?

Regards,
Markus

  reply	other threads:[~2019-02-15 13:55 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2019-02-15  7:55 [PATCH v5] coccinelle: semantic code search for missing put_device() Wen Yang
2019-02-15  9:10 ` Markus Elfring
2019-02-15 12:52 ` [PATCH v5] Coccinelle: " Markus Elfring
2019-02-15 13:02   ` Julia Lawall
2019-02-15 13:15     ` [v5] " Markus Elfring
2019-02-15 13:15     ` Markus Elfring
2019-02-15 13:24       ` Julia Lawall
2019-02-15 13:54         ` Markus Elfring [this message]
2019-03-17  3:54 ` [PATCH v5] coccinelle: " Masahiro Yamada
2019-03-17  9:05   ` [v5] " Markus Elfring
2019-03-23 16:17   ` Markus Elfring
2019-03-26  6:54     ` Masahiro Yamada
2019-03-26  7:19       ` Julia Lawall
2019-03-26  9:14         ` Markus Elfring
2019-03-26  9:04       ` Markus Elfring
2019-03-26  9:52         ` Masahiro Yamada
2019-03-26  9:58           ` Julia Lawall
     [not found] <201902161529041506841@zte.com.cn>
2019-02-16  8:09 ` [v5] Coccinelle: " Julia Lawall
2019-02-16  8:29   ` Markus Elfring
2019-02-16  8:32     ` Julia Lawall
2019-02-16  8:44       ` Markus Elfring

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly 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=b2f195e8-c3a3-f876-a075-317bb33496c6@web.de \
    --to=markus.elfring@web.de \
    --cc=Gilles.Muller@lip6.fr \
    --cc=cheng.shengyu@zte.com.cn \
    --cc=cocci@systeme.lip6.fr \
    --cc=julia.lawall@lip6.fr \
    --cc=kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=michal.lkml@markovi.net \
    --cc=nicolas.palix@imag.fr \
    --cc=wang.yi59@zte.com.cn \
    --cc=wen.yang99@zte.com.cn \
    --cc=yamada.masahiro@socionext.com \
    --cc=yellowriver2010@hotmail.com \
    /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
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
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).