[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.10.1606171732480.3164@hadrien>
Date: Fri, 17 Jun 2016 17:35:26 +0200 (CEST)
From: Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@...6.fr>
To: "Luis R. Rodriguez" <mcgrof@...nel.org>
cc: Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@...6.fr>, Gilles.Muller@...6.fr,
nicolas.palix@...g.fr, mmarek@...e.com,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
gregkh@...uxfoundation.org, markivx@...eaurora.org,
stephen.boyd@...aro.org, zohar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com,
broonie@...nel.org, ming.lei@...onical.com, tiwai@...e.de,
johannes@...solutions.net, chunkeey@...glemail.com,
hauke@...ke-m.de, jwboyer@...oraproject.org,
dmitry.torokhov@...il.com, dwmw2@...radead.org, jslaby@...e.com,
torvalds@...ux-foundation.org, cocci@...teme.lip6.fr
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 4/8] scripts: add glimpse.sh for indexing the kernel
On Fri, 17 Jun 2016, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 17, 2016 at 11:44:26AM +0200, Julia Lawall wrote:
> > I'm not sure that this is worth it. It adds a dependency on a tool that
> > seems not to be well maintained. In terms of Coccinelle, I'm not sure
> > that it gives a big benefit.
> >
> > Attached is a graph showing the file selection time for Coccinelle for a
> > selection of fairly complex semantic patches. Coccigrep is just a
> > line-by-line regexp search implemented in ocaml, gitgrep uses git grep.
> > In most cases, glimpse is clearly faster.
> >
> > On the other hand, it seems that glimpse often selects more files.
> > Sometimes a few more, eg 16 vs 14, and sometimes quite a lot more, eg 538
> > vs 236. I suspect that this is because glimpse considers _ to be a space,
> > and thus it can have many false positives. There are, however, a few
> > cases where glimpse also selects fewer files.
> >
> > The file processing time (ie parsing the file, searching for, matches of
> > the semantic patch in the file, and performing the transformation) is
> > normally much higher than the file selection time.
> >
> > So it seems that git grep is currently a better option for the kernel.
>
> Great, thanks, consider this patch dropped, do we want the heuristics
> for the cache index in place though or should I drop that as well ?
I assume you mean this patch:
[PATCH v2 3/8] coccicheck: add indexing enhancement options
I think it should be dropped. It adds complexity and git grep works
pretty well. If people want to use something else, they can use SPARGS,
or a .cocciconfig file, eg:
[spatch]
options = --use-glimpse
julia
Powered by blists - more mailing lists