linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] coccinelle: api/stream_open: Introduce metavariables for checks

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

Date:   Tue, 5 Apr 2022 07:34:17 -0500
From:   Nishanth Menon <nm@...com>
To:     Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@...ia.fr>
CC:     Nicolas Palix <nicolas.palix@...g.fr>,
        <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <cocci@...ia.fr>,
        Kirill Smelkov <kirr@...edi.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] coccinelle: api/stream_open: Introduce metavariables for
 checks

On 08:17-20220405, Julia Lawall wrote:
> 
> 
> On Mon, 4 Apr 2022, Nishanth Menon wrote:
> 
> > Coccinelle spatch version 1.1.1 reports the following:
> > warning: line 134: should no_llseek be a metavariable?
> > warning: line 141: should noop_llseek be a metavariable?
> > warning: line 223: should nonseekable_open be a metavariable?
> > warning: line 290: should nonseekable_open be a metavariable?
> > warning: line 338: should nonseekable_open be a metavariable?
> >
> > So, introduce the metavariable similar to other check instances.
> 
> This changes the semantic from matching the specific thing to anything.
> So are you sure that it is what is wanted?  If it should always be the
> specific thing, then you can get rid of the warning using eg symbol
> no_llseek.

Aaah thank you. Will post a v2 with s/identifier/symbol. I still need to
grok the nuance between the two in [1]. Thanks for clarifying.

[...]

[1] https://coccinelle.gitlabpages.inria.fr/website/docs/main_grammar.html
-- 
Regards,
Nishanth Menon
Key (0xDDB5849D1736249D) / Fingerprint: F8A2 8693 54EB 8232 17A3  1A34 DDB5 849D 1736 249D