linux-kernel - Re: [cocci] [PATCH] coccinelle: misc: minmax: Suppress reports for err returns

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: <f1f47166-00d7-49f3-9b80-34aa7b7b5510@web.de>
Date: Fri, 19 Apr 2024 08:51:19 +0200
From: Markus Elfring <Markus.Elfring@....de>
To: Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@...ia.fr>,
 Ricardo Ribalda <ribalda@...omium.org>, Denis Efremov <efremov@...ux.com>,
 Nicolas Palix <nicolas.palix@...g.fr>, cocci@...ia.fr,
 kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [cocci] [PATCH] coccinelle: misc: minmax: Suppress reports for
 err returns

>> Most of the people prefer:
>>
>> return ret < 0 ? ret: 0;
>>
>> than:
>>
>> return min(ret, 0);
>>
>> Let's tweak the cocci file to ignore those lines completely.
…
> Applied, thanks. (Coccinelle for-6.10 branch).

Was a planned code adjustment published?


…
>> +++ b/scripts/coccinelle/misc/minmax.cocci
>> @@ -50,11 +50,26 @@ func(...)
>>  	...>
>>  }
>>
>> +// Ignore errcode returns.
>> +@...code@
…
>> -// Don't generate patches for errcode returns.
>> -@...code depends on patch@
…

How does such a change fit to the usability of the coccicheck operation modes
“context” and “org”?

Should dependencies be reconsidered any more for the desired consistency
of involved rules for scripts of the semantic patch language?

Regards,
Markus