Wow - that's been a really fast response :-)
Well, the "huge C project" I talked about is the linux kernel, or more
precisely, its header files:
Having a few days off, I was curious to see how much effort it may take
to allow writing modules in C++.
With respect to the static inline functions, it looks like there are no
already existing function declaration that needs to be checked for, and
the functions
are actually simply defined along the lines
static inline <someReturnType> <someFunctionName>(<someParameters) {
<someCode> }
but "inline" is a macro which is defined as
#define inline inline __attribute__((always_inline)) notrace
or
#define inline inline notrace
depending on the kernel configuration, with notrace defined as
#define notrace __attribute__((no_instrument_function))
Thus, it should be possible to let Coccinelle see only the inline
keyword, without the additional hassle that may be introduced by attributes.
I have some appointment right now, but I'll definitely come back
tomorrow morning. Thanks a lot for looking into this so far!
Cheers,
Chris
Am 01.01.2015 um 17:02 schrieb Julia Lawall:
On Thu, 1 Jan 2015, Christof Warlich wrote:
Hi,
being absolutely new to Coccinelle, I see that fascinating things can be done
with it, but I kind of fail to adopt things towards my own needs:
I'd like to adapt the header files of a huge C project (gcc) so that they may
alternatively be included by C++ (g++) code. But many of the header files do
contain numerous inline function definitions of the form
static inline __attribute__((always_inline)) <someReturnType>
<someFunctionName>(<someParameters) {
<someCode>
}
While gcc happily accepts this type of code, g++ complains that specifying
attributes is not allowed during function definition, but only during
function declaration. Thus, the fix is straight forward: All these
occurrences must be replaced by something like
static inline __attribute__((always_inline)) <someReturnType>
<someFunctionName>(<someParameters);
<someReturnType> <someFunctionName>(<someParameters) {
<someCode>
}
Can anyone give me some guidance on how I can express this as a semantic
patch?
Unfortunately, there is no way to match against attributes. But it should
be possible to add them. Is the attribute in question always
__attribute__((always_inline))? Could it occur that some static inline
functions don't have this attribute? In that case would it be OK to add
the atribute anyway? Is it necessary to check for an existing function
declaration, or can one assume that it never exists?
julia
_______________________________________________
Cocci mailing list
[email protected]
https://systeme.lip6.fr/mailman/listinfo/cocci
