On Fri, 16 Oct 2020, Denis Efremov wrote:
> Check that alloc and free types of functions match each other.
>
> Signed-off-by: Denis Efremov
Applied, thanks.
> ---
> Changes in v2:
> - Lines are limited to 80 characters where possible
> - Confidence changed from High to Medium because of
>
> > How do you think about the possibility for any adjustments according to the
> > order
> > of the mentioned function names in proposed disjunctions for the semantic
> > patch language?
>
> Please think about this for 5 seconds. Maybe there are 2000 calls to
> these allocation functions, and m
On Fri, 16 Oct 2020, Markus Elfring wrote:
> …
> > +E = \(kmalloc\|kzalloc\|krealloc\|kcalloc\|
> > + kmalloc_node\|kzalloc_node\|kmalloc_array\|
> > + kmalloc_array_node\|kcalloc_node\)(...)@kok
> …
>
> How do you think about the possibility for any adjustments according t
…
> +E = \(kmalloc\|kzalloc\|krealloc\|kcalloc\|
> + kmalloc_node\|kzalloc_node\|kmalloc_array\|
> + kmalloc_array_node\|kcalloc_node\)(...)@kok
…
How do you think about the possibility for any adjustments according to the
order
of the mentioned function names in proposed di
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 excl
