[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <55F9BB79.20203@users.sourceforge.net>
Date: Wed, 16 Sep 2015 20:56:57 +0200
From: SF Markus Elfring <elfring@...rs.sourceforge.net>
To: Andrzej Hajda <a.hajda@...sung.com>
Cc: Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <b.zolnierkie@...sung.com>,
Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>,
Gilles Muller <Gilles.Muller@...6.fr>,
Michal Marek <mmarek@...e.com>,
Nicolas Palix <nicolas.palix@...g.fr>, cocci@...teme.lip6.fr,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] coccinelle: tests: unsigned value cannot be lesser
than zero
> As we discussed earlier I have dropped idea of adding v <= 0 as it is widely
> used in checking ranges, counters, quantities.
I find that such a design decision will need more fine-tuning of the suggested
small SmPL script.
> +@r depends on context || org || report@
> +position p;
> +typedef u8, u16, u32, u64;
> +{unsigned char, unsigned short int, unsigned int, unsigned long, unsigned long long, size_t, u8, u16, u32, u64} v;
Is it eventually needed to mention the key word "int" also together with the "long" data types?
> +@@
> +
> +(
> +*v@p < 0
> +|
> +*v@p >= 0
> +)
How do you think about to split this SmPL rule so that corresponding warning
messages will really fit?
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