>>> Unfortunately, I stumble on the error message “replacement: already >>> tagged token: >>> C code context” then. > > This is what I would expect.
I came along different application imaginations. > You could use one rule with an exists to put a position variable in the place > where you want to put a kfree, and then use another rule to put a kfree > at that position. I have got the impression from this information that you think in other directions than the use case I presented here once more (where the mentioned function call is not added). Can this kind of feedback eventually belong to an other recent topic? I would appreciate if transformation conflicts can be reduced also by the generic identification of error codes and jump targets for the combination of a bit of exception handling code. Regards, Markus _______________________________________________ Cocci mailing list [email protected] https://systeme.lip6.fr/mailman/listinfo/cocci
