I guess that failing the match is OK. So taking the position of a type
could be a way of imposing an explicit type, isn't it.
Nic.
On Mon, 2013-04-08 at 16:56 +0200, Julia Lawall wrote:
> Actually, what result would you prefer? In the previous fix that I made,
> I just caused the missing type, which was hidden under a macro, to make
> the match fail. In this case, though perhaps you would prefer T to be
> bound to int? That might cause some problemes, though, because it is not
> a real "int" in the source code...
>
> julia
>
> On Mon, 8 Apr 2013, Nic Volanschi (R&D) wrote:
>
> > If this may help, I stumbled against the same error in a different setting,
> > but I think the ultimate cause is the same:
> >
> > $ cat in.c
> > int foo()
> > {
> > register rI;
> > return rI;
> > }
> >
> > $ cat in.cocci
> > @f1@
> > identifier f;
> > position p;
> > type T;
> > @@
> > * T@p f;
> >
> > The reported error is the same: << Fatal error: exception Failure("empty
> > list, max_min_ii_by_pos") >>
> > I localized the problem on the variable declaration <<register rI;>> where
> > the type is missing (int by default). As soon as
> > you add the missing "int", the error disappears.
> > In fact, the error seems somewhat justified, as you are taking the position
> > of an inexistent type.
> >
> > I guess that in the big file indicated by Markus, the problematic
> > declaration is:
> >
> > static DEFINE_PER_CPU(unsigned long, cpu_loops_per_jiffy) = { 0 };
> >
> >
> > where we have the same missing, implicit int return type.
> >
> > Hope it helps,
> > Nic.
> >
> > On Wed, 2013-04-03 at 12:00 +0200, [email protected] wrote:
> >
> > ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> > Message: 1
> > Date: Tue, 02 Apr 2013 17:37:30 +0200
> > From: SF Markus Elfring <[email protected]>
> >
> >
> > Would you like to reproduce my issue with the following SmPL filter pattern
> > on
> > the source file
> > "https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/stable/linux-stable.git/tree/init/calibrate.c?id=8595c539f0360477189eef91f6337b
> > a44962f72d"?
> >
> >
> > ------------------------------
> >
> > Message: 3
> > Date: Tue, 2 Apr 2013 18:21:22 +0200 (CEST)
> > From: Julia Lawall <[email protected]>
> >
> >
> > I get the problem on the following code:
> >
> > irqreturn_t
> > nouveau_irq_handler(DRM_IRQ_ARGS)
> > {
> > struct drm_device *dev = arg;
> > struct nouveau_device *device = nouveau_dev(dev);
> > struct nouveau_mc *pmc = nouveau_mc(device);
> > u32 stat;
> >
> > stat = nv_rd32(device, 0x000100);
> > if (stat == 0 || stat == ~0)
> > return IRQ_NONE;
> >
> > nv_subdev(pmc)->intr(nv_subdev(pmc));
> > return IRQ_HANDLED;
> > }
> >
> > I would suspect that there is some inconsistency in how it is parsing this
> > kind of argument list. It seems to parse it OK, but then not be able to
> > match it against a pattern like ...,x,... I can look at it in more detail
> > tomorrow.
> >
> > julia
> >
> >
> >
> >
_______________________________________________
Cocci mailing list
[email protected]
https://systeme.lip6.fr/mailman/listinfo/cocci
