Re: Rename the SmPL script “kzalloc-….cocci”?
> If you want to be more general than kzalloc, then perhaps > zalloc-simple.cocci would be ok. Are you going to commit such a file name adjustment when it seems that you would not like to accept any other suggestion there? Regards, Markus
Re: Rename the SmPL script “kzalloc-….cocci”?
>> * I am unsure which name will be better finally. >> Would we like to achieve another permalink here? > > Actually, according to th original name choice it is stillsimple, The involved contributors have got different views if the available script remains “simple” enough at the moment. > becaue it doesn't account for the possibility of many statement between > the alloc and the memset * How close should these function call be kept together? * Which additional statements would you tolerate between them? > and it doesn't account for different ways of expressing the size between > the two calls. Would you like to get any extensions there? > If you want to be more general than kzalloc, then perhaps > zalloc-simple.cocci would be ok. Will other suffixes be safer for a permanent file name so that confusion could be avoided around different expectations for “simplicity”? Regards, Markus
Re: Rename the SmPL script “kzalloc-….cocci”?
On Tue, 2 Jan 2018, SF Markus Elfring wrote: > >> Now I find that it became more advanced than the previous version. > >> How do you think about to update also the corresponding file name > >> (instead of keeping the word “simple” there)? > > > > Why not send a patch for it yourself? > > * I would like to check your views around renaming of such files. > > * I am unsure which name will be better finally. > Would we like to achieve another permalink here? Actually, according to th original name choice it is stillsimple, becaue it doesn't account for the possibility of many statement between the alloc and the memset and it doesn't account for different ways of expressing the size between the two calls. If you want to be more general than kzalloc, then perhaps zalloc-simple.cocci would be ok. julia
Re: Rename the SmPL script “kzalloc-….cocci”?
>> Now I find that it became more advanced than the previous version. >> How do you think about to update also the corresponding file name >> (instead of keeping the word “simple” there)? > > Why not send a patch for it yourself? * I would like to check your views around renaming of such files. * I am unsure which name will be better finally. Would we like to achieve another permalink here? Regards, Markus
Re: Rename the SmPL script “kzalloc-….cocci”?
On Tue, 2 Jan 2018, SF Markus Elfring wrote: > Hello, > > A script for the semantic patch language was extended in significant ways. > > [PATCH v2] Coccinelle: kzalloc-simple: Add “all” zero allocating functions > https://lkml.org/lkml/2017/12/26/182 > https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/10133277/ > https://lkml.kernel.org/r/<1514324410-14561-1-git-send-email-himanshujha199...@gmail.com> > https://systeme.lip6.fr/pipermail/cocci/2017-December/004783.html > > Now I find that it became more advanced than the previous version. > How do you think about to update also the corresponding file name > (instead of keeping the word “simple” there)? Why not send a patch for it yourself? julia
Re: Rename the SmPL script “kzalloc-….cocci”?
Hello, A script for the semantic patch language was extended in significant ways. [PATCH v2] Coccinelle: kzalloc-simple: Add “all” zero allocating functions https://lkml.org/lkml/2017/12/26/182 https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/10133277/ https://lkml.kernel.org/r/<1514324410-14561-1-git-send-email-himanshujha199...@gmail.com> https://systeme.lip6.fr/pipermail/cocci/2017-December/004783.html Now I find that it became more advanced than the previous version. How do you think about to update also the corresponding file name (instead of keeping the word “simple” there)? Regards, Markus
