linux-kernel - Re: [3/5] Coccinelle: put_device: Merge four SmPL when constraints into one

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.20.1905131350330.1009@hadrien>
Date:   Mon, 13 May 2019 13:51:39 +0200 (CEST)
From:   Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@...6.fr>
To:     Markus Elfring <Markus.Elfring@....de>
cc:     Gilles Muller <Gilles.Muller@...6.fr>,
        Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@...ionext.com>,
        Michal Marek <michal.lkml@...kovi.net>,
        Nicolas Palix <nicolas.palix@...g.fr>,
        Wen Yang <wen.yang99@....com.cn>, cocci@...teme.lip6.fr,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Yi Wang <wang.yi59@....com.cn>
Subject: Re: [3/5] Coccinelle: put_device: Merge four SmPL when constraints
 into one



On Mon, 13 May 2019, Markus Elfring wrote:

> >> An assignment target was repeated in four SmPL when constraints.
> >> Combine the exclusion specifications into disjunctions for the semantic
> >> patch language so that this target is referenced only once there.
> >
> > NACK.
>
> I find this rejection questionable.
>
>
> > This exceeds 80 characters
>
> The line became 105 characters long.
> 14 space characters can eventually be omitted.
>
>
> > and provides no readability benefit.
>
> I try to stress SmPL functionality in this use case.

That's not the goal of the semantic patches in the kernel.

The rule is fine as it is.

> >> +++ b/scripts/coccinelle/free/put_device.cocci
> >> @@ -23,10 +23,7 @@ if (id == NULL || ...) { ... return ...; }
> >>      when != platform_device_put(id)
> >>      when != of_dev_put(id)
> >>      when != if (id) { ... put_device(&id->dev) ... }
> >> -    when != e1 = (T)id
> >> -    when != e1 = (T)(&id->dev)
> >> -    when != e1 = get_device(&id->dev)
> >> -    when != e1 = (T1)platform_get_drvdata(id)
> >> +    when != e1 = \( (T) \( id \| (&id->dev) \) \| get_device(&id->dev) \| (T1)platform_get_drvdata(id) \)
>
> How do you think about to extend the Coccinelle software in the way
> that such a detailed constraint can be specified on separate lines
> (without duplicated SmPL code)?

This causes some ambiguities in the parser.  No change is likely to occur
here.

julia

>
> How long will it take to reconsider corresponding software limitations?
>
> Regards,
> Markus
>