linux-kernel - Re: coccinelle: api/devm_platform_ioremap

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: <36f29ea7-7d08-fde4-daa9-e75675191e50@web.de>
Date:   Sun, 20 Oct 2019 07:45:50 +0200
From:   Markus Elfring <Markus.Elfring@....de>
To:     Marc Zyngier <maz@...nel.org>, kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org,
        Coccinelle <cocci@...teme.lip6.fr>
Cc:     Himanshu Jha <himanshujha199640@...il.com>,
        Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@...6.fr>,
        Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@...tlin.com>,
        Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>,
        Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
        Bartosz Golaszewski <bgolaszewski@...libre.com>,
        Gilles Muller <Gilles.Muller@...6.fr>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
        Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@...ionext.com>,
        Michal Marek <michal.lkml@...kovi.net>,
        Nicolas Palix <nicolas.palix@...g.fr>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        YueHaibing <yuehaibing@...wei.com>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: coccinelle: api/devm_platform_ioremap_resource: remove useless
 script

>>> I think part of the issue is that the script reports a WARNING

Would anybody like to change this category to “INFO”?

>> How much does this information influence really the stress tolerance
>> and change resistance (or acceptance) for the presented collateral evolution?
>> https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/log/scripts/coccinelle/api/devm_platform_ioremap_resource.cocci
>
> -ENOPARSE.

* Automated processes can trigger also big amounts of possible adjustments.

* The software development capacity will vary for affected components
  during the years.

* Implementing changes is a recurring project management task, isn't it?

>>> for something that is definitely correct code,
>>
>> Can related software improvement possibilities be taken into account
>> again under other circumstances?
>
> These patches provide no improvement whatsoever.

* Do you find information from the description of a corresponding
  commit 7945f929f1a77a1c8887a97ca07f87626858ff42
  ("drivers: provide devm_platform_ioremap_resource()") reasonable?
  https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/log/drivers/base/platform.c

* How do you think about to compare any differences with
  software build results?

> As pointed out, they mostly introduce bugs.

Would you like to check any error statistics in more detail?

> Providing Coccinelle scripts that scream about perfectly valid code is pointless,

They usually point opportunities out for further collateral evolution,
don't they?

> and the result is actively harmful.

You might not like some changes for a while.

> If said script was providing a correct semantic patch

I got the impression that this can also happen often enough.
Would you like to check the concrete transformation failure rate once more?

> instead of being an incentive for people to churn untested patches
> that span the whole tree, that'd be a different story.

Various developers got motivated to achieve something (possible improvements?)
also by the means of available software analysis tools.
Mistakes can then happen as usual during such adjustment attempts.

> But that's not what this is about.

I guess that your software development concerns can be clarified a bit more.

Regards,
Markus