linux-kernel - Re: [cocci] [RFC] Choosing “semantics” better for SmPL script parts?

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

Message-ID: <a507ebb3-d87e-46eb-ba58-b9a872fcfeef@web.de>
Date: Mon, 25 Aug 2025 17:17:26 +0200
From: Markus Elfring <Markus.Elfring@....de>
To: Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@...ia.fr>, cocci@...ia.fr
Cc: kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [cocci] [RFC] Choosing “semantics” better for SmPL script parts?

> The default is exists for use with * and forall with transformation, with
> the reasoning for the latter being that when transformation occurs the
> trasformed code should be consistent.  But there are cases where something
> else is desired, so this is controlled by the user.

Can SmPL script developers occasionally get any indications that they would expect
an opposite system setting?

Will the usage incidence become more interesting for the mentioned source code
search parameter?

Regards,
Markus