> Another possibility should be taken into account for source code variations.
>
> SmPL script example:
> @replacement@
> expression base, device1, device2, index, private;
> @@
> -private->res = platform_get_resource(device1, IORESOURCE_MEM, index);
> base =
> - devm_ioremap_resource
> + devm_platform_get_and_ioremap_resource
> (device2,
> + index, &
> private->res
> );
Such a transformation approach can work to some degree.
Thus I would expect that it can be reused for a case distinction in the way
of a SmPL disjunction like the following.
Another SmPL script example:
@replacement@
expression base, device1, device2, index, private, resource;
@@
-resource = platform_get_resource(device1, IORESOURCE_MEM, index);
base =
- devm_ioremap_resource
+ devm_platform_get_and_ioremap_resource
(
(
- &
device1
- ->dev
,
+ index, &
resource
|
device2,
+ index, &
private->res
)
);
Test command:
elfring@Sonne:~/Projekte/Coccinelle/janitor> spatch
use_devm_platform_get_and_ioremap_resource10.cocci
../Probe/i2c-rcar-excerpt-20200415.c
Now I wonder again why the known patch is not generated as expected so far.
How would you like to clarify this software situation?
Regards,
Markus
_______________________________________________
Cocci mailing list
[email protected]
https://systeme.lip6.fr/mailman/listinfo/cocci
