linux-kernel - Re: Coccinelle: Add a SmPL script for the reconsideration of redundant dev

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]

Date:   Fri, 21 Jun 2019 11:37:22 +0200
From:   Markus Elfring <Markus.Elfring@....de>
To:     Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@...6.fr>,
        kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org
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>,
        Coccinelle <cocci@...teme.lip6.fr>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Ding Xiang <dingxiang@...s.chinamobile.com>
Subject: Re: Coccinelle: Add a SmPL script for the reconsideration of
 redundant dev_err() calls

> I still don't see the point of specifying return.  Why not just S, where S
> is a statement metavariable?

Do you find the following SmPL change specification more appropriate?

@deletion depends on patch@
expression e;
statement s;
@@
 e = devm_ioremap_resource(...);
 if (IS_ERR(e))
(
-{
-   dev_err(...);
    s
-}
|
 {
 <+...
-   dev_err(...);
 ...+>
 }
)


Will any additional constraints become relevant?


>> Would this approach need a version check for the Coccinelle software?
>
> Why would that be necessary?

I guess that the application of SmPL disjunctions for if statements
can trigger development concerns.

Regards,
Markus