[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <542BFB2C.5070609@users.sourceforge.net>
Date: Wed, 01 Oct 2014 15:01:32 +0200
From: SF Markus Elfring <elfring@...rs.sourceforge.net>
To: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
CC: Coccinelle <cocci@...teme.lip6.fr>,
kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org, Michal Marek <mmarek@...e.cz>,
Chi Pham <chidaph@...il.com>,
Fabian Frederick <fabf@...net.be>,
Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH with Coccinelle?] Deletion of unnecessary checks before
specific function calls
>> If you are convinced that dropping the null tests is a good idea, then you
>> can submit the patch that makes the change to the relevant maintainers and
>> mailing lists.
Hello,
A couple of functions perform input parameter validation before their
implementations will try further actions with side effects. Some calling
functions perform similar safety checks.
Functions which release a system resource are occasionally documented in the way
that they tolerate the passing of a null pointer for example.
I do not see a need because of this fact that a function caller repeats a
corresponding check.
Now I would like to propose such a change again.
1. Extension of the infrastructure for the analysis tool "coccicheck"
Semantic patch patterns can help to identify update candidates also in the
Linux source file hierarchy.
https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/stable/linux-stable.git/tree/scripts/coccinelle?id=79f0345fefaafb7cde301a830471edd21a37989b
Would you like to reconsider an approach which was discussed with a subject
like "scripts/coccinelle/free: Delete NULL test before freeing functions?" a
while ago?
https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/8/9/36
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/linux.kernel/rIWfYsRRW6I/cTs6y0STf2cJ
2. Clarification for some automated update suggestions
My source code search approach found 227 functions with the help of the
software "Coccinelle 1.0.0-rc22" at least which might need another review and
corresponding corrections for Linux 3.16.3. Further software development will
point out even more potentially open issues.
Regards,
Markus
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists