linux-kernel - Re: Coccinelle: Handling of SmPL disjunctions

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>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <020c9629-fa44-170b-b2b0-baf3ba636a71@web.de>
Date:   Wed, 15 May 2019 09:33:18 +0200
From:   Markus Elfring <Markus.Elfring@....de>
To:     Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@...6.fr>
Cc:     Coccinelle <cocci@...teme.lip6.fr>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        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>,
        Yi Wang <wang.yi59@....com.cn>
Subject: Re: Coccinelle: Handling of SmPL disjunctions

>>>> Can different run time characteristics become relevant here?
>>>
>>> Internally, they should be identical.
>>
>> I got other imaginations in this area.
>
> You imagination doesn't matter in this case.

They might result in collateral software evolution.


> What matters is what the code does.

At the moment then …


> It expands out disjunctions on expressions to the statement level.> So the internal representation is the same.

Thanks for such additional information. Is it represented in the software
documentation (besides the source code format)?

How do you think about to increase the matching granularity
for this functionality?

Regards,
Markus