> OK, it seems that the structure is defined in the same file so no include
> options should be needed. But I have now lost track of what the
> semantic patch actually is, so I don't know what is the problem.
1. Unfortunately, I needed a bit longer to become more aware of relevant
differences in source code variations.
Another case distinction would be needed. Thus a corresponding
SmPL disjunction is probably required.
I have tried out to express the desired change by a SmPL specification
which can be a bit more precise.
@replacement@
expression base, device, private, resource;
@@
-resource = platform_get_resource(device, IORESOURCE_MEM, 0);
base =
- devm_ioremap_resource
+ devm_platform_get_and_ioremap_resource
(
(
- &
device
- ->dev
,
+ 0, &
resource
|
device,
+ 0, &
private->res
)
);
elfring@Sonne:~/Projekte/Coccinelle/janitor> spatch --parse-cocci
use_devm_platform_get_and_ioremap_resource6.cocci
…
warning: iso ptr_to_array does not match the code below on line 11
device->dev
the following code matched is not uniformly minus or context,
or contains a disjunction:
Exp:
device->dev
…
2. Would it be occasionally nice to intentionally express restrictions on
pointer data types by using the asterisk in metavariable declarations?
3. If we would require information from header files:
Is a file inclusion failure treated as an immediate SmPL script
execution error?
Regards,
Markus
_______________________________________________
Cocci mailing list
[email protected]
https://systeme.lip6.fr/mailman/listinfo/cocci
