> Sorry, I seem to have done something quite wrong on this patch. Interesting …
> I will fix it. Thanks. Development will be continued: https://lkml.org/lkml/2019/11/19/1681 https://lore.kernel.org/patchwork/patch/1156089/ https://lore.kernel.org/cocci/1574197705-31132-3-git-send-email-julia.law...@lip6.fr/ >> How do you think about to use the following SmPL code variant? > > And the benefit is what? … >> + ret = >> +(platform_get_irq >> +|platform_get_irq_byname >> +)(E, ...); >> + >> + if ( \( ret < 0 \| ret <= 0 \) ) >> +-{ >> +-dev_err(...); >> + S >> +-} * I suggest to use a different coding style for the specification of two function names in the SmPL disjunction. * Would you like to avoid the mixing of code items in the first text column? Regards, Markus _______________________________________________ Cocci mailing list Cocci@systeme.lip6.fr https://systeme.lip6.fr/mailman/listinfo/cocci
