> --- a/arch/arm/mach-ux500/cpu-db8500.c
> +++ b/arch/arm/mach-ux500/cpu-db8500.c
> @@ -296,7 +296,8 @@ static void __init u8500_init_machine(vo
> snowball_pinmaps_init();
> } else if (of_machine_is_compatible("st-ericsson,hrefv60+"))
> hrefv60_pinmaps_init();
> - else if (of_machine_is_compatible("st-ericsson,ccu9540")) {}
> + else {of_machine_is_compatible("st-ericsson,ccu9540");
> +}
I was initially mystified as to how the call to of_machine_is_compatible
got put into the {}, but that is not what happened. It is worried that
the call to of_machine_is_compatible represents more than one statement,
and it is trying to protect the new else, by wrapping a {} around it.
I've been working on the management of these {}s, and I would have thought
that the indentation would come out better, so this is a useful example
for me :)
> --- a/drivers/scsi/pm8001/pm8001_hwi.c
> +++ b/drivers/scsi/pm8001/pm8001_hwi.c
> @@ -3232,9 +3232,7 @@ void pm8001_bytes_dmaed(struct pm8001_hb
> id->dev_type = phy->identify.device_type;
> id->initiator_bits = SAS_PROTOCOL_ALL;
> id->target_bits = phy->identify.target_port_protocols;
> - } else if (phy->phy_type & PORT_TYPE_SATA) {
> - /*Nothing*/
> - }
> + } else {}
This the semantic patch would have to do explicitly. The specified
transformation only worked on the if, not the else in the context.
> PM8001_MSG_DBG(pm8001_ha, pm8001_printk("phy %d byte dmaded.\n", i));
>
> sas_phy->frame_rcvd_size = phy->frame_rcvd_size;
>
> This one should have the else dropped entirely.
>
> --- a/arch/mn10300/kernel/signal.c
> +++ b/arch/mn10300/kernel/signal.c
> @@ -413,8 +413,7 @@ static void do_signal(struct pt_regs *re
>
> signr = get_signal_to_deliver(&info, &ka, regs, NULL);
> if (signr > 0) {
> - if (handle_signal(signr, &info, &ka, regs) == 0) {
> - }
> + handle_signal(signr, &info, &ka, regs) == 0;
>
> return;
> }
>
> Here, the " == 0" is unnecessary.
Likewise, here the semantic patch has to do something explicitly. It
could have some special cases for common cases like == 0.
But anyway, I think that supporting the patch option is not a good idea in
this case.
julia
_______________________________________________
Cocci mailing list
[email protected]
https://systeme.lip6.fr/mailman/listinfo/cocci
