Hello,
I have constructed the following small SmPL script.
@duplicated_code@
identifier work;
statement s1, s2;
type T;
@@
T work(...)
{
... when any
*if (...)
*{
... when any
* s1
* s2
*}
... when any
*if (...)
*{
... when any
* s1
* s2
*}
... when any
}
Test result:
https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/drivers/net/ethernet/ti/netcp_ethss.c?id=75eac7b5f68b0a0671e795ac636457ee27cc11d8#n3562
https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/v5.1-rc4/source/drivers/net/ethernet/ti/netcp_ethss.c#L3562
@@ -1829,11 +1829,7 @@ static void gbe_reset_mod_stats(struct g
int i;
for (i = 0; i < gbe_dev->num_et_stats; i++) {
- if (gbe_dev->et_stats[i].type == stats_mod) {
p_stats_entry = base + gbe_dev->et_stats[i].offset;
- gbe_dev->hw_stats[i] = 0;
- gbe_dev->hw_stats_prev[i] = readl(p_stats_entry);
- }
}
}
@@ -2808,10 +2804,6 @@ static int gbe_set_rx_mode(void *intf_pr
cpsw_ale_control_set(ale, 0, ALE_AGEOUT, 1);
do {
cpu_relax();
- if (cpsw_ale_control_get(ale, 0, ALE_AGEOUT)) {
- ret = 0;
- break;
- }
} while (time_after(timeout, jiffies));
…
@@ -3657,31 +3636,14 @@ static int gbe_probe(struct netcp_device
ret = netcp_txpipe_init(&gbe_dev->tx_pipe, netcp_device,
gbe_dev->dma_chan_name, gbe_dev->tx_queue_id);
- if (ret) {
- of_node_put(interfaces);
- return ret;
- }
ret = netcp_txpipe_open(&gbe_dev->tx_pipe);
- if (ret) {
- of_node_put(interfaces);
- return ret;
- }
/* Create network interfaces */
INIT_LIST_HEAD(&gbe_dev->gbe_intf_head);
for_each_child_of_node(interfaces, interface) {
ret = of_property_read_u32(interface, "slave-port", &slave_num);
- if (ret) {
- dev_err(dev, "missing slave-port parameter, skipping
interface configuration for %pOFn\n",
- interface);
- continue;
- }
gbe_dev->num_slaves++;
- if (gbe_dev->num_slaves >= gbe_dev->max_num_slaves) {
- of_node_put(interface);
- break;
- }
}
of_node_put(interfaces);
Now I wonder again why the first two diff hunks are presented by this
source code search approach. It seems that the hits for the functions
“gbe_reset_mod_stats” and “gbe_set_rx_mode” are false positives
(because only one if statement is marked there).
The last diff hunk points an implementation detail out which is discussed
for the update suggestion “ethernet: ti: eliminate a bit of duplicate code
in gbe_probe()”.
https://lkml.org/lkml/2019/4/9/979
https://lore.kernel.org/patchwork/patch/1059888/
https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/[email protected]/
But it shows also source code places where the SmPL specification is
too generic so far.
Another SmPL script variant presents also a result for additional
considerations.
@duplicated_code@
identifier work;
statement s1, s2, es;
type T;
@@
T work(...)
{
... when any
*if (...)
*{
... when any
* s1
* s2
*}
else
es
... when any
*if (...)
*{
... when any
* s1
* s2
*}
else
es
... when any
}
@@ -3205,14 +3205,8 @@ static void init_secondary_ports(struct
slave->phy_node,
gbe_adjust_link_sec_slaves,
0, phy_mode);
- if (!slave->phy) {
dev_err(dev, "phy not found for slave %d\n",
slave->slave_num);
- } else {
- dev_dbg(dev, "phy found: id is: 0x%s\n",
- phydev_name(slave->phy));
- phy_start(slave->phy);
- }
}
}
I am curious if better solutions can be found for such software.
Regards,
Markus
_______________________________________________
Cocci mailing list
[email protected]
https://systeme.lip6.fr/mailman/listinfo/cocci
