[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.22.394.2203301005010.2592@hadrien>
Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2022 10:06:22 +0200 (CEST)
From: Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@...ia.fr>
To: Marcelo Schmitt <marcelo.schmitt1@...il.com>
cc: corbet@....net, mchehab+huawei@...nel.org, dlatypov@...gle.com,
davidgow@...gle.com, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org,
linux-sparse@...r.kernel.org, cocci@...ia.fr,
smatch@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
skhan@...uxfoundation.org, dan.carpenter@...cle.com,
julia.lawall@...ia.fr
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] Documentation: dev-tools: Enhance static analysis
section with discussion
> +Strong points of Smatch and Coccinelle
> +--------------------------------------
> +
> +Coccinelle is probably the easiest for writing checks. It works before the
> +pre-compiler so it's easier to check for bugs in macros using Coccinelle.
pre-processor
> +Coccinelle also writes patches fixes for you which no other tool does.
writes patches fixes -> creates patches
> +
> +With Coccinelle you can do a mass conversion from
you can -> you can, for example,
julia
> +``kmalloc(x * size, GFP_KERNEL)`` to ``kmalloc_array(x, size, GFP_KERNEL)``, and
> +that's really useful. If you just created a Smatch warning and try to push the
> +work of converting on to the maintainers they would be annoyed. You'd have to
> +argue about each warning if can really overflow or not.
> +
> +Coccinelle does no analysis of variable values, which is the strong point of
> +Smatch. On the other hand, Coccinelle allows you to do simple things in a simple
> +way.
> --
> 2.35.1
>
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists