> Now I would like to point another analysis concern out. You informed me about an approach for the usage of when constraints with the semantic patch language in the following way according to the discussion topic “Detection of unused function return values” (on 2011-12-11).
“… Rule r checks that there is no use on any execution path. …” I came along the use case again to work with related information. The currently discussed SmPL script variant points also the following source code place out for further considerations. https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/v5.4-rc2/source/drivers/gpu/drm/arm/display/komeda/komeda_dev.c#L210 https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/next/linux-next.git/tree/drivers/gpu/drm/arm/display/komeda/komeda_dev.c?id=c4b9850b3676869ac0def5885d781d17f64b3a86#n222 … @@ -222,… @@ struct komeda_dev *komeda_dev_create(str clk_prepare_enable(mdev->aclk); - mdev->funcs = product->identify(mdev->reg_base, &mdev->chip); if (!komeda_product_match(mdev, product->product_id)) { … mdev->funcs->init_format_table(mdev); err = mdev->funcs->enum_resources(mdev); … Now I would appreciate once more if the description for the supported software behaviour can be completed for the safe usage of SmPL code exclusion specifications. I see that a function pointer is appropriately used here. Thus I wonder where my understanding of the software situation around the program “spatch” seems still too incomplete. Regards, Markus _______________________________________________ Cocci mailing list [email protected] https://systeme.lip6.fr/mailman/listinfo/cocci
