From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.0 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1E392C43381 for ; Sun, 17 Feb 2019 12:52:33 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E99EE2195D for ; Sun, 17 Feb 2019 12:52:32 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1728762AbfBQMwb (ORCPT ); Sun, 17 Feb 2019 07:52:31 -0500 Received: from mail2-relais-roc.national.inria.fr ([192.134.164.83]:20978 "EHLO mail2-relais-roc.national.inria.fr" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1727534AbfBQMwb (ORCPT ); Sun, 17 Feb 2019 07:52:31 -0500 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.58,380,1544482800"; d="scan'208";a="369734265" Received: from abo-58-107-68.mrs.modulonet.fr (HELO hadrien) ([85.68.107.58]) by mail2-relais-roc.national.inria.fr with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 17 Feb 2019 13:52:28 +0100 Date: Sun, 17 Feb 2019 13:52:28 +0100 (CET) From: Julia Lawall X-X-Sender: jll@hadrien To: Markus Elfring cc: Wen Yang , Gilles Muller , Nicolas Palix , Michal Marek , Masahiro Yamada , Wen Yang , Cheng Shengyu , kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org, LKML , Coccinelle Subject: Re: [v6] coccinelle: semantic code search for missing put_device() In-Reply-To: <10836645-5b19-a748-56d7-c0572a76ab4d@web.de> Message-ID: References: <8e7ba7c0-b7fe-a1f0-d28b-0c716ecbcfdb@web.de> <1c152067-0135-79d7-1285-4bb9925054c8@web.de> <782fd1c3-80ff-a296-b3a2-351257bb13b3@web.de> <10836645-5b19-a748-56d7-c0572a76ab4d@web.de> User-Agent: Alpine 2.21 (DEB 202 2017-01-01) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="8323329-712726055-1550407948=:2444" Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org This message is in MIME format. The first part should be readable text, while the remaining parts are likely unreadable without MIME-aware tools. --8323329-712726055-1550407948=:2444 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT On Sun, 17 Feb 2019, Markus Elfring wrote: > >> If you would insist on the specification of such an assignment exclusion > >> for a SmPL ellipsis: > >> Can we agree on a correct order? > > > > I don't get your point. > > I propose to take another closer look at a bit of SmPL code. > > > > There is no correct order. > > I have got an other software development view here. > > > > Each order expresses something different. > > I agree to this information. > > > > The order that is currently in the semantic patch is the one > > that is more likely in practice. > > Please check once more. > > … > +@search exists@ > +local idexpression id; > +expression x,e,e1; > +position p1,p2; > … > +@@ > + > +id = of_find_device_by_node@p1(x) > +... when != e = id > … > > Or: > > … > + ... when != id = e > … > > > Which SmPL specification will achieve the desired software behaviour? The desired behavior is to check whether the allocated value is saved in some other variable (typically a structure field) and thus it doesn't need to be freed just because the original local variable goes out of scope at the end of the function. when != e = id achieves this behavior. julia --8323329-712726055-1550407948=:2444--