[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <bfde9b91-0c5d-31a0-4b1b-5f675152b2f8@web.de>
Date: Wed, 15 May 2019 10:36:52 +0200
From: Markus Elfring <Markus.Elfring@....de>
To: Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@...6.fr>
Cc: Wen Yang <wen.yang99@....com.cn>,
Gilles Muller <Gilles.Muller@...6.fr>,
Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@...ionext.com>,
Michal Marek <michal.lkml@...kovi.net>,
Nicolas Palix <nicolas.palix@...g.fr>,
Yi Wang <wang.yi59@....com.cn>,
Cheng Shengyu <cheng.shengyu@....com.cn>,
Ma Jiang <ma.jiang@....com.cn>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Coccinelle <cocci@...teme.lip6.fr>
Subject: Re: [3/3] Coccinelle: pci_free_consistent: Extend when constraints
for two SmPL ellipses
>> 1, "id = (T2)(e)" is rare.
>
> Thanks for checking. I don't really care if it is rare.
I got related source code analysis concerns.
> There should not be much cost to this.
Each additional filter will influence the software run times and
possible results.
> On the other hand, I do care about causing false negatives.
Do you find the missing warning after the addition of such an exclusion
specification interesting?
Regards,
Markus
Powered by blists - more mailing lists