date:20200803

[Cocci] [PATCH v2] coccinelle: api: add kvmalloc script

2020-08-03 Thread Denis Efremov

Suggest kvmalloc instead of opencoded kmalloc && vmalloc condition.

Signed-off-by: Denis Efremov 
---
Changes in v2:
 - binary operator cmp added
 - NULL comparisions simplified
 - "T x" case added to !patch mode

 scripts/coccinelle/api/kvmalloc.cocci | 142 ++
 1 file changed, 142 insertions(+)
 create mode 100644 scripts/coccinelle/api/kvmalloc.cocci

diff --git a/scripts/coccinelle/api/kvmalloc.cocci 
b/scripts/coccinelle/api/kvmalloc.cocci
new file mode 100644
index ..20b22e3d0f74
--- /dev/null
+++ b/scripts/coccinelle/api/kvmalloc.cocci
@@ -0,0 +1,142 @@
+// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0-only
+///
+/// Find if/else condition with kmalloc/vmalloc calls.
+/// Suggest to use kvmalloc instead.
+///
+// Confidence: High
+// Copyright: (C) 2020 Denis Efremov ISPRAS
+// Options: --no-includes --include-headers
+//
+
+virtual patch
+virtual report
+virtual org
+virtual context
+
+@opportunity depends on !patch@
+expression E, E1, size;
+binary operator cmp = {<=, <, ==, >, >=};
+identifier x;
+type T;
+position p;
+@@
+
+(
+* if (size cmp E1 || ...)@p {
+...
+*E = \(kmalloc\|kzalloc\|kcalloc\|kmalloc_node\|kzalloc_node\|
+*  kmalloc_array\|kmalloc_array_node\|kcalloc_node\)(..., size, ...)
+...
+  } else {
+...
+*E = \(vmalloc\|vzalloc\|vmalloc_node\|vzalloc_node\)(..., size, ...)
+...
+  }
+|
+* E = \(kmalloc\|kzalloc\|kcalloc\|kmalloc_node\|kzalloc_node\|
+*   kmalloc_array\|kmalloc_array_node\|kcalloc_node\)(..., size, ...)
+  ... when != E = E1
+  when != size = E1
+  when any
+* if (E == NULL)@p {
+...
+*   E = \(vmalloc\|vzalloc\|vmalloc_node\|vzalloc_node\)(..., size, ...)
+...
+  }
+|
+* T x = \(kmalloc\|kzalloc\|kcalloc\|kmalloc_node\|kzalloc_node\|
+* kmalloc_array\|kmalloc_array_node\|kcalloc_node\)(..., size, ...);
+  ... when != x = E1
+  when != size = E1
+  when any
+* if (x == NULL)@p {
+...
+*   x = \(vmalloc\|vzalloc\|vmalloc_node\|vzalloc_node\)(..., size, ...)
+...
+  }
+)
+
+@depends on patch@
+expression E, E1, flags, size, node;
+binary operator cmp = {<=, <, ==, >, >=};
+identifier x;
+type T;
+@@
+
+(
+- if (size cmp E1)
+-E = kmalloc(size, flags);
+- else
+-E = vmalloc(size);
++ E = kvmalloc(size, flags);
+|
+- E = kmalloc(size, flags | __GFP_NOWARN);
+- if (E == NULL)
+-   E = vmalloc(size);
++ E = kvmalloc(size, flags);
+|
+- T x = kmalloc(size, flags | __GFP_NOWARN);
+- if (x == NULL)
+-   x = vmalloc(size);
++ T x = kvmalloc(size, flags);
+|
+- if (size cmp E1)
+-E = kzalloc(size, flags);
+- else
+-E = vzalloc(size);
++ E = kvzalloc(size, flags);
+|
+- E = kzalloc(size, flags | __GFP_NOWARN);
+- if (E == NULL)
+-   E = vzalloc(size);
++ E = kvzalloc(size, flags);
+|
+- T x = kzalloc(size, flags | __GFP_NOWARN);
+- if (x == NULL)
+-   x = vzalloc(size);
++ T x = kvzalloc(size, flags);
+|
+- if (size cmp E1)
+-E = kmalloc_node(size, flags, node);
+- else
+-E = vmalloc_node(size, node);
++ E = kvmalloc_node(size, flags, node);
+|
+- E = kmalloc_node(size, flags | __GFP_NOWARN, node);
+- if (E == NULL)
+-   E = vmalloc_node(size, node);
++ E = kvmalloc_node(size, flags, node);
+|
+- T x = kmalloc_node(size, flags | __GFP_NOWARN, node);
+- if (x == NULL)
+-   x = vmalloc_node(size, node);
++ T x = kvmalloc_node(size, flags, node);
+|
+- if (size cmp E1)
+-E = kvzalloc_node(size, flags, node);
+- else
+-E = vzalloc_node(size, node);
++ E = kvzalloc_node(size, flags, node);
+|
+- E = kvzalloc_node(size, flags | __GFP_NOWARN, node);
+- if (E == NULL)
+-   E = vzalloc_node(size, node);
++ E = kvzalloc_node(size, flags, node);
+|
+- T x = kvzalloc_node(size, flags | __GFP_NOWARN, node);
+- if (x == NULL)
+-   x = vzalloc_node(size, node);
++ T x = kvzalloc_node(size, flags, node);
+)
+
+@script: python depends on report@
+p << opportunity.p;
+@@
+
+coccilib.report.print_report(p[0], "WARNING: opportunity for kvmalloc")
+
+@script: python depends on org@
+p << opportunity.p;
+@@
+
+coccilib.org.print_todo(p[0], "WARNING: opportunity for kvmalloc")
-- 
2.26.2

___
Cocci mailing list
Cocci@systeme.lip6.fr
https://systeme.lip6.fr/mailman/listinfo/cocci

[Cocci] [PATCH v7] coccinelle: api: add kfree_mismatch script

2020-08-03 Thread Denis Efremov

Check that alloc and free types of functions match each other.

Signed-off-by: Denis Efremov 
---
Changes in v2:
 - Lines are limited to 80 characters where possible
 - Confidence changed from High to Medium because of 
   fs/btrfs/send.c:1119 false-positive
 - __vmalloc_area_node() explicitly excluded from analysis
   instead of !(file in "mm/vmalloc.c") condition
Changes in v3:
 - prints style in org && report modes changed for python2
Changes in v4:
 - missing msg argument to print_todo fixed
Changes in v5:
 - fix position p in kfree rule
 - move @kok and @v positions in choice rule after the arguments
 - remove kvmalloc suggestions
Changes in v6:
 - more asterisks added in context mode
 - second @kok added to the choice rule
Changes in v7:
 - file renamed to kfree_mismatch.cocci
 - python function relevant() removed
 - additional rule for filtering free positions added
 - btrfs false-positive fixed
 - confidence level changed to high
 - kvfree_switch rule added
 - names for position variables changed to @a (alloc) and @f (free)

 scripts/coccinelle/api/kfree_mismatch.cocci | 229 
 1 file changed, 229 insertions(+)
 create mode 100644 scripts/coccinelle/api/kfree_mismatch.cocci

diff --git a/scripts/coccinelle/api/kfree_mismatch.cocci 
b/scripts/coccinelle/api/kfree_mismatch.cocci
new file mode 100644
index ..9e9ef9fd7a25
--- /dev/null
+++ b/scripts/coccinelle/api/kfree_mismatch.cocci
@@ -0,0 +1,229 @@
+// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0-only
+///
+/// Check that kvmalloc'ed memory is freed by kfree functions,
+/// vmalloc'ed by vfree functions and kvmalloc'ed by kvfree
+/// functions.
+///
+// Confidence: High
+// Copyright: (C) 2020 Denis Efremov ISPRAS
+// Options: --no-includes --include-headers
+//
+
+virtual patch
+virtual report
+virtual org
+virtual context
+
+@alloc@
+expression E, E1;
+position kok, vok;
+@@
+
+(
+  if (...) {
+...
+E = \(kmalloc\|kzalloc\|krealloc\|kcalloc\|
+  kmalloc_node\|kzalloc_node\|kmalloc_array\|
+  kmalloc_array_node\|kcalloc_node\)(...)@kok
+...
+  } else {
+...
+E = \(vmalloc\|vzalloc\|vmalloc_user\|vmalloc_node\|
+  vzalloc_node\|vmalloc_exec\|vmalloc_32\|
+  vmalloc_32_user\|__vmalloc\|__vmalloc_node_range\|
+  __vmalloc_node\)(...)@vok
+...
+  }
+|
+  E = \(kmalloc\|kzalloc\|krealloc\|kcalloc\|kmalloc_node\|kzalloc_node\|
+kmalloc_array\|kmalloc_array_node\|kcalloc_node\)(...)@kok
+  ... when != E = E1
+  when any
+  if (E == NULL) {
+...
+E = \(vmalloc\|vzalloc\|vmalloc_user\|vmalloc_node\|
+  vzalloc_node\|vmalloc_exec\|vmalloc_32\|
+  vmalloc_32_user\|__vmalloc\|__vmalloc_node_range\|
+  __vmalloc_node\)(...)@vok
+...
+  }
+)
+
+@free@
+expression E;
+position fok;
+@@
+
+  E = \(kvmalloc\|kvzalloc\|kvcalloc\|kvzalloc_node\|kvmalloc_node\|
+kvmalloc_array\)(...)
+  ...
+  kvfree(E)@fok
+
+@vfree depends on !patch@
+expression E;
+position a != alloc.kok;
+position f != free.fok;
+@@
+
+* E = \(kmalloc\|kzalloc\|krealloc\|kcalloc\|kmalloc_node\|
+*   kzalloc_node\|kmalloc_array\|kmalloc_array_node\|
+*   kcalloc_node\)(...)@a
+  ... when != if (...) { ... E = 
\(vmalloc\|vzalloc\|vmalloc_user\|vmalloc_node\|vzalloc_node\|vmalloc_exec\|vmalloc_32\|vmalloc_32_user\|__vmalloc\|__vmalloc_node_range\|__vmalloc_node\)(...);
 ... }
+  when != is_vmalloc_addr(E)
+  when any
+* \(vfree\|vfree_atomic\|kvfree\)(E)@f
+
+@depends on patch exists@
+expression E;
+position a != alloc.kok;
+position f != free.fok;
+@@
+
+  E = \(kmalloc\|kzalloc\|krealloc\|kcalloc\|kmalloc_node\|
+kzalloc_node\|kmalloc_array\|kmalloc_array_node\|
+kcalloc_node\)(...)@a
+  ... when != if (...) { ... E = 
\(vmalloc\|vzalloc\|vmalloc_user\|vmalloc_node\|vzalloc_node\|vmalloc_exec\|vmalloc_32\|vmalloc_32_user\|__vmalloc\|__vmalloc_node_range\|__vmalloc_node\)(...);
 ... }
+  when != is_vmalloc_addr(E)
+  when any
+- \(vfree\|vfree_atomic\|kvfree\)(E)@f
++ kfree(E)
+
+@kfree depends on !patch@
+expression E;
+position a != alloc.vok;
+position f != free.fok;
+@@
+
+* E = \(vmalloc\|vzalloc\|vmalloc_user\|vmalloc_node\|vzalloc_node\|
+*   vmalloc_exec\|vmalloc_32\|vmalloc_32_user\|__vmalloc\|
+*   __vmalloc_node_range\|__vmalloc_node\)(...)@a
+  ... when != is_vmalloc_addr(E)
+  when any
+* \(kfree\|kzfree\|kvfree\)(E)@f
+
+@depends on patch exists@
+expression E;
+position a != alloc.vok;
+position f != free.fok;
+@@
+
+  E = \(vmalloc\|vzalloc\|vmalloc_user\|vmalloc_node\|vzalloc_node\|
+vmalloc_exec\|vmalloc_32\|vmalloc_32_user\|__vmalloc\|
+__vmalloc_node_range\|__vmalloc_node\)(...)@a
+  ... when != is_vmalloc_addr(E)
+  when any
+- \(kfree\|kvfree\)(E)@f
++ vfree(E)
+
+@kvfree depends on !patch@
+expression E;
+position a, f;
+@@
+
+* E = \(kvmalloc\|kvzalloc\|kvcalloc\|kvzalloc_node\|kvmalloc_node\|
+*   kvmalloc_array\)(...)@a
+  ... when != is_vmalloc_addr(E)
+

Re: [Cocci] [PATCH] coccinelle: api: add kvmalloc script

2020-08-03 Thread Julia Lawall



On Mon, 3 Aug 2020, Markus Elfring wrote:

> …
> > +++ b/scripts/coccinelle/api/kvmalloc.cocci
> …
> > +@opportunity depends on !patch@
> > +expression E, E1, size;
> > +position p;
> > +@@
> > +
> > +(
> …
> > +|
> > +* E = \(kmalloc\|kzalloc\|kcalloc\|kmalloc_node\|kzalloc_node\|
> > +*   kmalloc_array\|kmalloc_array_node\|kcalloc_node\)(..., size, ...)
> > +  ... when != E = E1
> > +  when != size = E1
> > +  when any
> > +* if (\(!E\|E == NULL\))@p {

Actually, you shouldn't need both E == NULL and !E.  E == NULL should be
sufficient.

julia

> …
>
> I suggest to extend the SmPL code exclusion specification so that
> pointer dereferences will be filtered out before the shown null pointer 
> detection.
>
>
> > +@depends on patch@
> > +expression E, E1, flags, size, node;
> > +identifier x;
> > +type T;
> > +@@
> > +
> > +(
> > +- if (\(size <= E1\|size < E1\|size == E1\|size > E1\))
>
> This condition check is repeated a few times.
> Thus I imagine that the usage of another metavariable with a SmPL constraint
> can eventually be helpful.
>
> +binary operator bo = {<=, <, ==, >};
> …
> +-if (size bo E1)
>
>
>
> > +-E = kmalloc(size, flags);
> > +- else
> > +-E = vmalloc(size);
>
> Will it be interesting to support also the use of conditional operators
> by another part of a SmPL disjunction?
>
> -E = (…) ? kmalloc(size, flags) : vmalloc(size);
>
>
> > ++ E = kvmalloc(size, flags);
> > +|
> > +- E = kmalloc(size, flags | __GFP_NOWARN);
> > +- if (\(!E\|E == NULL\))
> > +-   E = vmalloc(size);
> > ++ E = kvmalloc(size, flags);
>
> This source code replacement line is repeated. Thus I imagine
> that it would be nice if such SmPL code duplication could be avoided
> by the application of another SmPL disjunction.
> Unfortunately, the software “Coccinelle 1.0.8-00146-g04f36d53” presents
> the error message “15: no available token to attach to” then.
> Would you like to adjust anything in this area?
>
> Regards,
> Markus
>___
Cocci mailing list
Cocci@systeme.lip6.fr
https://systeme.lip6.fr/mailman/listinfo/cocci

Re: [Cocci] [PATCH v6] coccinelle: api: add kvfree script

2020-08-03 Thread Julia Lawall




On Mon, 3 Aug 2020, Denis Efremov wrote:

>
>
> On 8/2/20 11:24 PM, Julia Lawall wrote:
> >> +@initialize:python@
> >> +@@
> >> +# low-level memory api
> >> +filter = frozenset(['__vmalloc_area_node'])
> >> +
> >> +def relevant(p):
> >> +return not (filter & {el.current_element for el in p})
> >
> > Is this used?
>
> I'll remove it in v8. Or do you want me to add iterate_dir_item() in the list?

What is that?

>
> >
> > Otherwise, I think it would be good to not warn about a use of kvfree
> > if that use is reachable from a kvmalloc.  There seems to be such a false
> > positive in fs/btrfs/send.c, on line 1118.
>
> I don't know how to handle this case without position filter.
> It's too complex. In iterate_dir_item() there is:
> buf = kmalloc(buf_len, GFP_KERNEL);
> while(...) {
>   if (...) {
>   if (is_vmalloc_addr(buf)) {
>   vfree(buf);
>   ...
>   } else {
>   char *tmp = krealloc(buf, ...);
>
>   if (!tmp)
>   kfree(buf);
>   ...
>   }
>   if (!buf) {
>   buf = kvmalloc(buf_len, GFP_KERNEL);
>   ...
>   }
>   }
> }
> kvfree(buf);
>
> Adding "when != kvfree(E)" is not enough:
> * E = \(kvmalloc\|kvzalloc\|kvcalloc\|kvzalloc_node\|kvmalloc_node\|
> *   kvmalloc_array\)(...)@k
>   ... when != is_vmalloc_addr(E)
> + when != kvfree(E)
>   when any
> * \(kfree\|kzfree\|vfree\|vfree_atomic\)(E)@p

Why not just

@ok exists@
position p;
expression E;
@@

E = kvalloc(...)
...
kvfree@p(...)

Probably that is what you mean by a position filter, but why not add a
position filter?

julia


> >
> > It also seems that when there are both a kmalloc and a vmalloc, there is
> > no warning if kfree or vfree is used.  Is that intentional?
> >
>
> No, I will try to address it in v8.
>
> Regards,
> Denis
>
___
Cocci mailing list
Cocci@systeme.lip6.fr
https://systeme.lip6.fr/mailman/listinfo/cocci

Re: [Cocci] [PATCH v6] coccinelle: api: add kvfree script

2020-08-03 Thread Julia Lawall

On Mon, 3 Aug 2020, Denis Efremov wrote:

> Is there a difference from cocci point of view between:
>
> ... when != !is_vmalloc_addr(E)

This will only reject cases where the ! is present.  Coccinelle doesn't
apply isomorphisms to the C source code, so it doesn't detect that eg

if (A)
  B
else C

could be rewritten as

if (!A)
  C
ese B

So when != !A would only match when the code is in the second form.
>
> and
>
> ... when != is_vmalloc_addr(E)
>
> Should the latter one be used in most cases?

This matches both a call to is_vmalloc_addr and a negated call, so it is
more general.

julia
___
Cocci mailing list
Cocci@systeme.lip6.fr
https://systeme.lip6.fr/mailman/listinfo/cocci

Re: [Cocci] [PATCH v6] coccinelle: api: add kvfree script

2020-08-03 Thread Denis Efremov

Is there a difference from cocci point of view between:

... when != !is_vmalloc_addr(E)

and 

... when != is_vmalloc_addr(E)

Should the latter one be used in most cases?

Thanks,
Denis
___
Cocci mailing list
Cocci@systeme.lip6.fr
https://systeme.lip6.fr/mailman/listinfo/cocci

Re: [Cocci] [PATCH v6] coccinelle: api: add kvfree script

2020-08-03 Thread Denis Efremov




On 8/2/20 11:24 PM, Julia Lawall wrote:
>> +@initialize:python@
>> +@@
>> +# low-level memory api
>> +filter = frozenset(['__vmalloc_area_node'])
>> +
>> +def relevant(p):
>> +return not (filter & {el.current_element for el in p})
> 
> Is this used?

I'll remove it in v8. Or do you want me to add iterate_dir_item() in the list?

> 
> Otherwise, I think it would be good to not warn about a use of kvfree
> if that use is reachable from a kvmalloc.  There seems to be such a false
> positive in fs/btrfs/send.c, on line 1118.

I don't know how to handle this case without position filter.
It's too complex. In iterate_dir_item() there is:
buf = kmalloc(buf_len, GFP_KERNEL);
while(...) {
if (...) {
if (is_vmalloc_addr(buf)) {
vfree(buf);
...
} else {
char *tmp = krealloc(buf, ...);

if (!tmp)
kfree(buf);
...
}
if (!buf) {
buf = kvmalloc(buf_len, GFP_KERNEL);
...
}
}
}
kvfree(buf);

Adding "when != kvfree(E)" is not enough:
* E = \(kvmalloc\|kvzalloc\|kvcalloc\|kvzalloc_node\|kvmalloc_node\|
*   kvmalloc_array\)(...)@k
... when != is_vmalloc_addr(E)
+   when != kvfree(E)
when any
* \(kfree\|kzfree\|vfree\|vfree_atomic\)(E)@p

> 
> It also seems that when there are both a kmalloc and a vmalloc, there is
> no warning if kfree or vfree is used.  Is that intentional?
> 

No, I will try to address it in v8.

Regards,
Denis
___
Cocci mailing list
Cocci@systeme.lip6.fr
https://systeme.lip6.fr/mailman/listinfo/cocci

[Cocci] [PATCH] coccinelle: api: add kvmalloc script

2020-08-03 Thread Denis Efremov

Suggest kvmalloc instead of opencoded kmalloc && vmalloc condition.

Signed-off-by: Denis Efremov 
---

If coccinelle fails with "Segmentation fault" during analysis, then
one needs to increase stack limit, e.g. ulimit -s 32767.

Current, I've sent only one patch for this rule and will send the rest
after the merge window. https://lkml.org/lkml/2020/7/31/986

 scripts/coccinelle/api/kvmalloc.cocci | 127 ++
 1 file changed, 127 insertions(+)
 create mode 100644 scripts/coccinelle/api/kvmalloc.cocci

diff --git a/scripts/coccinelle/api/kvmalloc.cocci 
b/scripts/coccinelle/api/kvmalloc.cocci
new file mode 100644
index ..76d6aeab7c09
--- /dev/null
+++ b/scripts/coccinelle/api/kvmalloc.cocci
@@ -0,0 +1,127 @@
+// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0-only
+///
+/// Find conditions in code for kmalloc/vmalloc calls.
+/// Suggest to use kvmalloc instead.
+///
+// Confidence: High
+// Copyright: (C) 2020 Denis Efremov ISPRAS
+// Options: --no-includes --include-headers
+//
+
+virtual patch
+virtual report
+virtual org
+virtual context
+
+@opportunity depends on !patch@
+expression E, E1, size;
+position p;
+@@
+
+(
+* if (\(size <= E1\|size < E1\|size == E1\|size > E1\) || ...)@p {
+...
+*E = \(kmalloc\|kzalloc\|kcalloc\|kmalloc_node\|kzalloc_node\|
+*  kmalloc_array\|kmalloc_array_node\|kcalloc_node\)(..., size, ...)
+...
+  } else {
+...
+*E = \(vmalloc\|vzalloc\|vmalloc_node\|vzalloc_node\)(..., size, ...)
+...
+  }
+|
+* E = \(kmalloc\|kzalloc\|kcalloc\|kmalloc_node\|kzalloc_node\|
+*   kmalloc_array\|kmalloc_array_node\|kcalloc_node\)(..., size, ...)
+  ... when != E = E1
+  when != size = E1
+  when any
+* if (\(!E\|E == NULL\))@p {
+...
+*   E = \(vmalloc\|vzalloc\|vmalloc_node\|vzalloc_node\)(..., size, ...)
+...
+  }
+)
+
+@depends on patch@
+expression E, E1, flags, size, node;
+identifier x;
+type T;
+@@
+
+(
+- if (\(size <= E1\|size < E1\|size == E1\|size > E1\))
+-E = kmalloc(size, flags);
+- else
+-E = vmalloc(size);
++ E = kvmalloc(size, flags);
+|
+- E = kmalloc(size, flags | __GFP_NOWARN);
+- if (\(!E\|E == NULL\))
+-   E = vmalloc(size);
++ E = kvmalloc(size, flags);
+|
+- T x = kmalloc(size, flags | __GFP_NOWARN);
+- if (\(!x\|x == NULL\))
+-   x = vmalloc(size);
++ T x = kvmalloc(size, flags);
+|
+- if (\(size <= E1\|size < E1\|size == E1\|size > E1\))
+-E = kzalloc(size, flags);
+- else
+-E = vzalloc(size);
++ E = kvzalloc(size, flags);
+|
+- E = kzalloc(size, flags | __GFP_NOWARN);
+- if (\(!E\|E == NULL\))
+-   E = vzalloc(size);
++ E = kvzalloc(size, flags);
+|
+- T x = kzalloc(size, flags | __GFP_NOWARN);
+- if (\(!x\|x == NULL\))
+-   x = vzalloc(size);
++ T x = kvzalloc(size, flags);
+|
+- if (\(size <= E1\|size < E1\|size == E1\|size > E1\))
+-E = kmalloc_node(size, flags, node);
+- else
+-E = vmalloc_node(size, node);
++ E = kvmalloc_node(size, flags, node);
+|
+- E = kmalloc_node(size, flags | __GFP_NOWARN, node);
+- if (\(!E\|E == NULL\))
+-   E = vmalloc_node(size, node);
++ E = kvmalloc_node(size, flags, node);
+|
+- T x = kmalloc_node(size, flags | __GFP_NOWARN, node);
+- if (\(!x\|x == NULL\))
+-   x = vmalloc_node(size, node);
++ T x = kvmalloc_node(size, flags, node);
+|
+- if (\(size <= E1\|size < E1\|size == E1\|size > E1\))
+-E = kvzalloc_node(size, flags, node);
+- else
+-E = vzalloc_node(size, node);
++ E = kvzalloc_node(size, flags, node);
+|
+- E = kvzalloc_node(size, flags | __GFP_NOWARN, node);
+- if (\(!E\|E == NULL\))
+-   E = vzalloc_node(size, node);
++ E = kvzalloc_node(size, flags, node);
+|
+- T x = kvzalloc_node(size, flags | __GFP_NOWARN, node);
+- if (\(!x\|x == NULL\))
+-   x = vzalloc_node(size, node);
++ T x = kvzalloc_node(size, flags, node);
+)
+
+@script: python depends on report@
+p << opportunity.p;
+@@
+
+coccilib.report.print_report(p[0], "WARNING: opportunity for kvmalloc")
+
+@script: python depends on org@
+p << opportunity.p;
+@@
+
+coccilib.org.print_todo(p[0], "WARNING: opportunity for kvmalloc")
-- 
2.26.2

___
Cocci mailing list
Cocci@systeme.lip6.fr
https://systeme.lip6.fr/mailman/listinfo/cocci

Re: [Cocci] [00/43] cocci: Add support for meta attributes to SmPL

2020-08-03 Thread Jaskaran Singh

On Mon, 2020-08-03 at 07:37 +0200, Markus Elfring wrote:
> > > Do you care if a SmPL name variable would accidentally not be
> > > used
> > > (like in the script “
> > > https://github.com/coccinelle/coccinelle/blob/04f36d537b9f6c0c127d05184cccd21f1a46b952/tests/metaattr.cocci#L2”
> > > )?
> > 
> > It actually is used, to help parsing the .c file.  This information
> > will
> > be added to the documentation shortly.
> 
> I would expect that the following SmPL script variant will generate
> also a patch.
> (Why would extra “help” be needed for parsing source files?)
> 
> @replacement@
> attribute a;
> identifier b;
> @@
> -int
> +char
>  b a = 1;
> 
> 
> By the way:
> I have noticed another detail which I find questionable at the
> moment.
> 
> elfring@Sonne:~/Projekte/Coccinelle/20160205> spatch --parse-cocci
> tests/metaattr-2.cocci
> …
> (
> -int
>   >>> char
>  b a = 1;
> -signed
>   >>> char
> -int b a = 1;
> )
> …
> 

Probably a pretty printing mistake. I'll fix this.

Thanks,
Jaskaran.

> I would interpret the display for the second part of such a SmPL
> disjunction
> in the way that a variable definition will be deleted (instead of
> taking only
> the key word “signed” also into account according to the isomorphism
> “add_signed”).
> 
> Regards,
> Markus

___
Cocci mailing list
Cocci@systeme.lip6.fr
https://systeme.lip6.fr/mailman/listinfo/cocci

[Cocci] [PATCH v2] coccinelle: api: add kvmalloc script

[Cocci] [PATCH v7] coccinelle: api: add kfree_mismatch script

Re: [Cocci] [PATCH] coccinelle: api: add kvmalloc script

Re: [Cocci] [PATCH v6] coccinelle: api: add kvfree script

Re: [Cocci] [PATCH v6] coccinelle: api: add kvfree script

Re: [Cocci] [PATCH v6] coccinelle: api: add kvfree script

Re: [Cocci] [PATCH v6] coccinelle: api: add kvfree script

[Cocci] [PATCH] coccinelle: api: add kvmalloc script

Re: [Cocci] [00/43] cocci: Add support for meta attributes to SmPL

9 matches

Site Navigation

Mail list logo

Footer information