>> The uncertainty around the partly (un)documented software behaviour >> for SmPL when constraints makes it unclear then if the presented >> source code place should finally be treated as a false positive.
Are you going to do anything more for this concern? >> Should it have been excluded because pointer expressions should be detectable >> for the metavariable “y” (a bit later)? > > Coccinelle only knows the type of mdev->funcs if it sees the type > definition of mdev. This information can be appropriate. But we can also guess that another pointer operation should usually happen when another arrow was specified behind such an expression, can't we? > It doesn't take into account the subsequent usage of mdev->funcs > to determine that this value is a pointer. Should this software behaviour be changed anyhow? Can the data processing become more helpful around the influence of pointer expressions? Regards, Markus _______________________________________________ Cocci mailing list Cocci@systeme.lip6.fr https://systeme.lip6.fr/mailman/listinfo/cocci
