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=-2.3 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_INVALID,DKIM_SIGNED, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_MUTT 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 637ECC072B5 for ; Fri, 24 May 2019 06:07:22 +0000 (UTC) Received: from isis.lip6.fr (isis.lip6.fr [132.227.60.2]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A87AF2175B for ; Fri, 24 May 2019 06:07:21 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (1024-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="T7LDFzx1" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org A87AF2175B Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=kernel.org Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=cocci-bounces@systeme.lip6.fr Received: from systeme.lip6.fr (systeme.lip6.fr [132.227.104.7]) by isis.lip6.fr (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id x4O673Fp017261; Fri, 24 May 2019 08:07:03 +0200 (CEST) Received: from systeme.lip6.fr (systeme.lip6.fr [127.0.0.1]) by systeme.lip6.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id B072D7752; Fri, 24 May 2019 08:07:03 +0200 (CEST) Received: from isis.lip6.fr (isis.lip6.fr [132.227.60.2]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by systeme.lip6.fr (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 56362768D for ; Mon, 20 May 2019 19:20:45 +0200 (CEST) Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by isis.lip6.fr (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id x4KHKhEi022219 for ; Mon, 20 May 2019 19:20:44 +0200 (CEST) Received: from localhost (c-73-47-72-35.hsd1.nh.comcast.net [73.47.72.35]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id BA7F720675; Mon, 20 May 2019 17:20:42 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=default; t=1558372843; bh=y0qgGqkaWE/kipSaEaPyyR8jq8PGYKXzIS0tbcLGqT8=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=T7LDFzx1/j26xdrmdGnd4Vxk/tKpX7CER1YFC7xEGVrpLONxw97rPMieYRiUi4u67 9+K/Y+woV2VZBB/bKo7nxunaBn+FEQtPoFiOQfiD7j/JzUZuBGKAbfcikO+wPJ+Eoq 2qXVXVKUCa9CCxJTkx1bTlVpUNre2LKuXkUMmmjo= Date: Mon, 20 May 2019 13:20:41 -0400 From: Sasha Levin To: Julia Lawall Message-ID: <20190520172041.GH11972@sasha-vm> References: <201905171432571474636@zte.com.cn> <20190520093303.GA9320@atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13) X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, Sender e-mail whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.4.3 (isis.lip6.fr [132.227.60.2]); Fri, 24 May 2019 08:07:04 +0200 (CEST) X-Greylist: Sender passed SPF test, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.4.3 (isis.lip6.fr [132.227.60.2]); Mon, 20 May 2019 19:20:44 +0200 (CEST) X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.78 on 132.227.60.2 X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.78 on 132.227.60.2 X-Mailman-Approved-At: Fri, 24 May 2019 08:07:02 +0200 Cc: michal.lkml@markovi.net, nicolas.palix@imag.fr, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, cocci@systeme.lip6.fr, Markus.Elfring@web.de, Pavel Machek , wen.yang99@zte.com.cn Subject: Re: [Cocci] Coccinelle: semantic patch for missing of_node_put X-BeenThere: cocci@systeme.lip6.fr X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed" Sender: cocci-bounces@systeme.lip6.fr Errors-To: cocci-bounces@systeme.lip6.fr On Mon, May 20, 2019 at 11:52:37AM +0200, Julia Lawall wrote: > > >On Mon, 20 May 2019, Pavel Machek wrote: > >> Hi! >> >> > A semantic patch has no access to comments. The only thing I can see to >> > do is to use python to interact with some external tools. For example, >> > you could write some code to collect the comments in a file and the lines >> > on which they occur, and then get the comment that most closely precedes >> > the start of the function. >> >> How dangerous is missing of_node_put? AFAICT it will only result into >> very small, one-time memory leak, right? >> >> Could we make sure these patches are _not_ going to stable? Leaking >> few bytes once per boot is not really a serious bug. > >Sasha, > >Probably patches that add only of_node_put should not be auto selected for >stable. I can filter them out, but those are fixes, right? Why are we concerned about them making it into -stable? -- Thanks, Sasha _______________________________________________ Cocci mailing list Cocci@systeme.lip6.fr https://systeme.lip6.fr/mailman/listinfo/cocci 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=-2.6 required=3.0 tests=DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS, USER_AGENT_MUTT 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 DB73FC04AAC for ; Mon, 20 May 2019 17:20:44 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B0D60208C3 for ; Mon, 20 May 2019 17:20:44 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=default; t=1558372844; bh=y0qgGqkaWE/kipSaEaPyyR8jq8PGYKXzIS0tbcLGqT8=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:List-ID:From; b=WToBCR1BzzpYKFs9O8zbVjhIbEUx7g9naOfkey0Roi6XHFrxicA+wFQEAoUrZLHIa jMWNRAfGooxwvaMo9Rd8ziDgsjWC1jE3oluz6UasP4so3C4fSHElc5yPcu8PQTble2 WzKRba0XYZ1yKX0I/Z8w07sgZBV7r6iyEUiPanUs= Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S2392818AbfETRUn (ORCPT ); Mon, 20 May 2019 13:20:43 -0400 Received: from mail.kernel.org ([198.145.29.99]:37264 "EHLO mail.kernel.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1733069AbfETRUn (ORCPT ); Mon, 20 May 2019 13:20:43 -0400 Received: from localhost (c-73-47-72-35.hsd1.nh.comcast.net [73.47.72.35]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id BA7F720675; Mon, 20 May 2019 17:20:42 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=default; t=1558372843; bh=y0qgGqkaWE/kipSaEaPyyR8jq8PGYKXzIS0tbcLGqT8=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=T7LDFzx1/j26xdrmdGnd4Vxk/tKpX7CER1YFC7xEGVrpLONxw97rPMieYRiUi4u67 9+K/Y+woV2VZBB/bKo7nxunaBn+FEQtPoFiOQfiD7j/JzUZuBGKAbfcikO+wPJ+Eoq 2qXVXVKUCa9CCxJTkx1bTlVpUNre2LKuXkUMmmjo= Date: Mon, 20 May 2019 13:20:41 -0400 From: Sasha Levin To: Julia Lawall Cc: Pavel Machek , wen.yang99@zte.com.cn, Markus.Elfring@web.de, cocci@systeme.lip6.fr, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Gilles Muller , yamada.masahiro@socionext.com, michal.lkml@markovi.net, nicolas.palix@imag.fr Subject: Re: Coccinelle: semantic patch for missing of_node_put Message-ID: <20190520172041.GH11972@sasha-vm> References: <201905171432571474636@zte.com.cn> <20190520093303.GA9320@atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, May 20, 2019 at 11:52:37AM +0200, Julia Lawall wrote: > > >On Mon, 20 May 2019, Pavel Machek wrote: > >> Hi! >> >> > A semantic patch has no access to comments. The only thing I can see to >> > do is to use python to interact with some external tools. For example, >> > you could write some code to collect the comments in a file and the lines >> > on which they occur, and then get the comment that most closely precedes >> > the start of the function. >> >> How dangerous is missing of_node_put? AFAICT it will only result into >> very small, one-time memory leak, right? >> >> Could we make sure these patches are _not_ going to stable? Leaking >> few bytes once per boot is not really a serious bug. > >Sasha, > >Probably patches that add only of_node_put should not be auto selected for >stable. I can filter them out, but those are fixes, right? Why are we concerned about them making it into -stable? -- Thanks, Sasha