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

Date: Fri, 19 Apr 2024 09:01:21 +0200 (CEST)
From: Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@...ia.fr>
To: Markus Elfring <Markus.Elfring@....de>
cc: 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, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [cocci] [PATCH] coccinelle: misc: minmax: Suppress reports for
 err returns



On Fri, 19 Apr 2024, Markus Elfring wrote:

> >> 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?

There is no "planned code adjustment" if there is no patch.

I can check the dependencies again.

julia

>
>
> …
> >> +++ 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
>