On 06/08/2017 03:50 AM, Markus Armbruster wrote: >>> Your script differs from Markus', we should figure out if they can be >>> merged into one. >> >> One notable difference is that I abuse expression, instead of type. I didn't >> manage to teach spatch about the includes and custom type (--all-includes >> didn't work). I just tried with expression and it was happy, I haven't >> searched further. > > Does your semantic patch more, less, or both?
I have not tried to find out - but the idea would be: if you run Markus' script first, does Marc-André's find anything? if you run Marc-André's script first, does Markus' find anything? >> Sadly, my script is really far from perfect. And I don't how much time it >> will take me to make it better, and if I really want to spend that time for >> this. In any case, the result needs careful review. So thought it would be >> easier to provide a patch that I manually changed/reviewed, rather than a >> full cocci script. On the other hand, since it is something that we have done repeatedly, having it reviewed into a full cocci script that we store in git will make future re-runs easier (we can incrementally improve the cocci script as we gain experience with additional patterns that work). > > I can play with the script when this series reaches the front of my > review queue. Fingers crossed that your review queue isn't a year long any more (even if I do understand that you will not be reviewing much during your time off later this month). -- Eric Blake, Principal Software Engineer Red Hat, Inc. +1-919-301-3266 Virtualization: qemu.org | libvirt.org
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
