On 11/20/20 12:54 PM, Alexandru Ardelean wrote:
On Fri, Nov 20, 2020 at 12:47 PM Julia Lawall wrote:
On Thu, 19 Nov 2020, Joe Perches wrote:
On Thu, 2020-11-19 at 17:16 +0200, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
On Thu, Nov 19, 2020 at 4:09 PM Alexandru Ardelean
wrote:
Hey,
So, I stumbled on a new
On 09/27/2018 08:51 PM, Kees Cook wrote:
> Hi,
>
> This .cocci takes a VERY long time to run against the kernel, and I'd
> love to know what I could do to improve it. I assume it's related to
> the use of the "=~" operand:
>
Maybe I'm missing something, but do you need all of those variations?
On 10/13/2016 07:01 PM, Vaishali Thakkar wrote:
>
>
> On Thursday 13 October 2016 09:45 PM, Julia Lawall wrote:
>>
>>
>> On Thu, 13 Oct 2016, Vaishali Thakkar wrote:
>>
>>> Currently because of the left associativity of the operators,
>>> pattern IRQF_ONESHOT | flags does not match with the
On 12/03/2015 02:04 PM, Peter Hurley wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I'm struggling with the grammar necessary to find struct definitions
> missing an initializer.
>
> The background is that many tty interfaces include a method/operations
> table (named fields of function ptrs). For example, given a
On 10/02/2014 10:12 PM, jmiguel hernandez wrote:
if i have this
typedef struct type1 {
char8 a;
char8 b;
char8 c;
}
typedef struct _interface {
type1 field1;
}interface;
and want to change to
typedef struct type1 {
char8 d;
char8 b;
char8 c;
}
typedef struct _protocol {
On 08/17/2014 07:42 PM, Julia Lawall wrote:
On Sun, 17 Aug 2014, Joe Perches wrote:
On Sun, 2014-08-17 at 18:09 +0200, SF Markus Elfring wrote:
I would prefer to be able to convert
*(skb-data + frame_size / 2 + 10)
not to
(skb-data + frame_size / 2)[10]
but to
On 08/18/2014 11:49 AM, Julia Lawall wrote:
Actually, isn't the whoe structure field the wrong way to go about it
here? Don't we just want a pointer-typed expression, of whatever form it
has? That will unfortunately require lots of type information, but I
don't see how to do it otherewise,
On 08/18/2014 11:49 AM, Julia Lawall wrote:
Actually, isn't the whoe structure field the wrong way to go about it
here? Don't we just want a pointer-typed expression, of whatever form it
has? That will unfortunately require lots of type information, but I
don't see how to do it otherewise,
On 04/27/2014 12:50 PM, Javier Martinez Canillas wrote:
Using the BIT() macro instead of manually shifting bits
makes the code less error prone.
If is more readable is a matter of taste so only replace
if the file is already using this macro.
Signed-off-by: Javier Martinez Canillas
On 05/20/2013 07:34 PM, Wolfram Sang wrote:
Hi,
using 1.0-rc16 from debian, I use the following semantic patch:
@@
expression r, p, n;
@@
r = platform_get_resource(p, IORESOURCE_MEM, n);
...
(
- if (!r) { ... }
|
- if (unlikely(!r)) { ... }
|
- if
On 05/20/2013 08:24 PM, Wolfram Sang wrote:
There is already an isomorphism for unlikely. But it is in one direction
only, so 'unlikely(E)' in your cocci script will also match 'E', but 'E'
wont match 'unlikely(E)'.
Okay, but I would then still need 'unlikely(!r)' and 'unlikely(r ==
11 matches
Mail list logo
