> Is this self-check functionality planned for a patch in the Linux kernel,
> or for some oher use?  Because the python script that I suggested for
> collecting the names of all of the files will imply parsing all of those
> files, which will have a major negative impact on performance.

Yes, I've almost prepared it. It's more like a PoC, of course you are free not
to taking it. I just find it interesting to implement. I hope you enjoy it.
The check will depend on additional "virtual selfcheck", so I expect that the
performance will not downgrade much.

Perhaps it
> could be possible to have the complete list of files available in the
> initialize rule, like you expected.  But I wonder if the difference
> between "the file is not in the initial list" and "the file is in the
> initial list but it is ignored" is important for you?

"the file is in the initial list but it is ignored" is ok to me. I don't know
how to get it.

The problem is that I need to know that the "mm/util.c" file is in the scope.
We know that a pattern should match a function in the "mm/util.c" file
and report only in case it doesn't. We don't need to report if the tool
is not processing the file "mm/util.c" at all. That is why we need the full
list of files.

Thanks,
Denis
_______________________________________________
Cocci mailing list
[email protected]
https://systeme.lip6.fr/mailman/listinfo/cocci

Reply via email to