Thanks for testing it. I will see if there is some other way to improve the performance. Sent from my iPhone
> On 23 Sep 2024, at 09:01, Hongbo Li <lihongb...@huawei.com> wrote: > > > >> On 2024/9/19 14:25, Julia Lawall wrote: >>> On Wed, 11 Sep 2024, Hongbo Li wrote: >>> After str_true_false() has been introduced in the tree, >>> we can add rules for finding places where str_true_false() >>> can be used. A simple test can find over 10 locations. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Hongbo Li <lihongb...@huawei.com> >>> --- >>> scripts/coccinelle/api/string_choices.cocci | 19 +++++++++++++++++++ >>> 1 file changed, 19 insertions(+) >>> >>> diff --git a/scripts/coccinelle/api/string_choices.cocci >>> b/scripts/coccinelle/api/string_choices.cocci >>> index 5e729f187f22..6942ad7c4224 100644 >>> --- a/scripts/coccinelle/api/string_choices.cocci >>> +++ b/scripts/coccinelle/api/string_choices.cocci >>> @@ -85,3 +85,22 @@ e << str_down_up_r.E; >>> @@ >>> >>> coccilib.report.print_report(p[0], "opportunity for str_down_up(%s)" % e) >>> + >>> +@str_true_false depends on patch@ >>> +expression E; >>> +@@ >>> +- ((E) ? "true" : "false") >>> ++ str_true_false(E) >>> + >>> +@str_true_false_r depends on !patch exists@ >>> +expression E; >>> +position P; >>> +@@ >>> +* ((E@P) ? "true" : "false") >> Hello, >> The semantic patch is quite slow. Actually it tests a large number of >> cases, eg where the parentheses are present and where they are not. >> A small optimization is possible in the non-patch case. The outer >> parentheses are not needed, because you will already get the same >> information whether they are there or not. >> In contrast, for the patch case, the outer parentheses are needed, because >> if they are there we want to remove them, since they are not needed for >> the function call. >> Could you update the depends on !patch cases to remove the outer >> parentheses? > > You mean in non-patch case, we could just write like the following?: > > +@str_true_false_r depends on !patch exists@ > +expression E; > +position P; > +@@ > +* (E@P) ? "true" : "false" > > I have tested in my machine. The impact of this parenthesis on performance is > very minimal. > > With parentheses, the time on driver/ costs: > > real 1m41.696s > user 85m24.069s > sys 1m8.891s > > Without parentheses, the time on driver/ costs: > > real 1m40.438s > user 85m53.987s > sys 1m7.981s > > > Thanks, > Hongbo > >> Also, just one patch would be fine. There are many changes, but they are >> all sort of the same, so it would be easier just to see them all at once. >> thanks, >> julia >>> + >>> +@script:python depends on report@ >>> +p << str_true_false_r.P; >>> +e << str_true_false_r.E; >>> +@@ >>> + >>> +coccilib.report.print_report(p[0], "opportunity for str_true_false(%s)" % >>> e) >>> -- >>> 2.34.1 >>> >>>
