lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2020]   [Sep]   [2]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH] coccinelle: ifnullfree: add vfree(), kvfree*() functions


On Wed, 2 Sep 2020, Markus Elfring wrote:

> …
> > +++ b/scripts/coccinelle/free/ifnullfree.cocci
> > @@ -20,8 +20,14 @@ expression E;
> > - if (E != NULL)
> > (
> > kfree(E);
> > +|
> > + kvfree(E);
> > |
> > kfree_sensitive(E);
> > +|
> > + kvfree_sensitive(E, ...);
> > +|
> > + vfree(E);
> > |
> > debugfs_remove(E);
> > |
>
> Would you ever get into the development mood to move the source code search
> specification “(E);” out of the SmPL disjunction (as it happened for the rule “r”)?
>
>
> > @@ -42,9 +48,10 @@ position p;
> > @@
> >
> > * if (E != NULL)
> > -* \(kfree@p\|kfree_sensitive@p\|debugfs_remove@p\|debugfs_remove_recursive@p\|
> > +* \(kfree@p\|kvfree@p\|kfree_sensitive@p\|kvfree_sensitive@p\|vfree@p\|
> > +* debugfs_remove@p\|debugfs_remove_recursive@p\|
> > * usb_free_urb@p\|kmem_cache_destroy@p\|mempool_destroy@p\|
> > -* dma_pool_destroy@p\)(E);
> > +* dma_pool_destroy@p\)(E, ...);
> …
>
> How do you think about to attach the position variable to the opening parenthesis
> instead of each function name?
>
> +* dma_pool_destroy\)(@p E, ...);

While it probably impacts few people, this is a really bad idea for org
mode, because org mode colors the thing that the position variable is
attached to. Having the ( colored would not be very visible.

But even for report mode, this is probably not a good idea for the rare
case where the function name and the argument list are on different lines.

julia

>
>
> Would the number of function call parameters influence such SmPL code any more?
>
> Regards,
> Markus
>
\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2020-09-02 09:24    [W:0.035 / U:2.136 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site