[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <33c75c5f-59d5-5fd4-6767-6144b4f245bc@users.sourceforge.net>
Date: Fri, 19 Aug 2016 15:26:34 +0200
From: SF Markus Elfring <elfring@...rs.sourceforge.net>
To: Amitoj Kaur Chawla <amitoj1606@...il.com>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Coccinelle <cocci@...teme.lip6.fr>,
Gilles Muller <Gilles.Muller@...6.fr>,
Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@...6.fr>,
Michal Marek <mmarek@...e.com>,
Nicolas Palix <nicolas.palix@...g.fr>
Subject: Re: [Cocci] Coccinelle: Script to replace allocate and memset with
zalloc functions
>> I suggest to take another look at a few implementation details.
>>
>> 1. Would it make sense to merge such SmPL rules into one
>> so that code duplication could be reduced a bit
>> in such a script?
>>
>> 2. How do you think about to extend the shown check list
>> with the function "kvm_kvzalloc"?
…
> kvm_kvzalloc function doesn't fit the same pattern as the other
> functions in this semantic patch, and is kvm specific,
Has this one got a similar function property?
Do you prefer to exclude such functions which belong to subsystems
so far generally?
> so the semantic patch looks fine as is.
How do you think about to express the shown source code repetition
as an aspect by an other script format?
Regards,
Markus
Powered by blists - more mailing lists