* [Cocci] [PATCH v2 1/1] scripts/coccinelle: use BIT macro if used
@ 2014-04-27 10:50 ` Javier Martinez Canillas
0 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Javier Martinez Canillas @ 2014-04-27 10:50 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: cocci
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 <javier@dowhile0.org>
---
Changes since v1:
- Add a rule that checks if the file is already using this macro
as suggested by Julia Lawall
scripts/coccinelle/api/bit.cocci | 30 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
1 file changed, 30 insertions(+)
create mode 100644 scripts/coccinelle/api/bit.cocci
diff --git a/scripts/coccinelle/api/bit.cocci b/scripts/coccinelle/api/bit.cocci
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..a02cfd3
--- /dev/null
+++ b/scripts/coccinelle/api/bit.cocci
@@ -0,0 +1,30 @@
+// Use the BIT() macro if is already used
+//
+// Confidence: High
+// Copyright (C) 2014 Javier Martinez Canillas. GPLv2.
+// URL: http://coccinelle.lip6.fr/
+// Options: --include-headers
+
+ at hasbitops@
+@@
+
+#include <linux/bitops.h>
+
+ at usesbit@
+@@
+
+BIT(...)
+
+ at depends on hasbitops && usesbit@
+expression E;
+@@
+
+- 1 << E
++ BIT(E)
+
+@depends on hasbitops && usesbit@
+expression E;
+@@
+
+- BIT((E))
++ BIT(E)
--
1.9.1
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v2 1/1] scripts/coccinelle: use BIT macro if used
@ 2014-04-27 10:50 ` Javier Martinez Canillas
0 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Javier Martinez Canillas @ 2014-04-27 10:50 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Julia Lawall
Cc: Michal Marek, Wolfram Sang, cocci, linux-kernel,
Javier Martinez Canillas
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 <javier@dowhile0.org>
---
Changes since v1:
- Add a rule that checks if the file is already using this macro
as suggested by Julia Lawall
scripts/coccinelle/api/bit.cocci | 30 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
1 file changed, 30 insertions(+)
create mode 100644 scripts/coccinelle/api/bit.cocci
diff --git a/scripts/coccinelle/api/bit.cocci b/scripts/coccinelle/api/bit.cocci
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..a02cfd3
--- /dev/null
+++ b/scripts/coccinelle/api/bit.cocci
@@ -0,0 +1,30 @@
+// Use the BIT() macro if is already used
+//
+// Confidence: High
+// Copyright (C) 2014 Javier Martinez Canillas. GPLv2.
+// URL: http://coccinelle.lip6.fr/
+// Options: --include-headers
+
+@hasbitops@
+@@
+
+#include <linux/bitops.h>
+
+@usesbit@
+@@
+
+BIT(...)
+
+@depends on hasbitops && usesbit@
+expression E;
+@@
+
+- 1 << E
++ BIT(E)
+
+@depends on hasbitops && usesbit@
+expression E;
+@@
+
+- BIT((E))
++ BIT(E)
--
1.9.1
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* [Cocci] [PATCH v2 1/1] scripts/coccinelle: use BIT macro if used
2014-04-27 10:50 ` Javier Martinez Canillas
@ 2014-04-29 16:18 ` Lars-Peter Clausen
-1 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Lars-Peter Clausen @ 2014-04-29 16:18 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: cocci
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 <javier@dowhile0.org>
I don't think this should be enabled by default. It will generate a ton of
false positives, not everything that is 1 shifted by something is a
single-bit field. E.g. imagine a device with multi-bit fields:
#define FOOBAR_A (0 << FOOBAR_OFFSET)
#define FOOBAR_B (1 << FOOBAR_OFFSET)
#define FOOBAR_C (2 << FOOBAR_OFFSET)
#define FOOBAR_D (3 << FOOBAR_OFFSET)
The script will now suggest to replace FOOBAR_B (1 << FOOBAR_OFFSET) with
FOOBAR_B BIT(FOOBAR_OFFSET). Which is technically correct, but not semantically.
- Lars
> ---
>
> Changes since v1:
> - Add a rule that checks if the file is already using this macro
> as suggested by Julia Lawall
>
> scripts/coccinelle/api/bit.cocci | 30 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> 1 file changed, 30 insertions(+)
> create mode 100644 scripts/coccinelle/api/bit.cocci
>
> diff --git a/scripts/coccinelle/api/bit.cocci b/scripts/coccinelle/api/bit.cocci
> new file mode 100644
> index 0000000..a02cfd3
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/scripts/coccinelle/api/bit.cocci
> @@ -0,0 +1,30 @@
> +// Use the BIT() macro if is already used
> +//
> +// Confidence: High
> +// Copyright (C) 2014 Javier Martinez Canillas. GPLv2.
> +// URL: http://coccinelle.lip6.fr/
> +// Options: --include-headers
> +
> + at hasbitops@
> +@@
> +
> +#include <linux/bitops.h>
> +
> + at usesbit@
> +@@
> +
> +BIT(...)
> +
> + at depends on hasbitops && usesbit@
> +expression E;
> +@@
> +
> +- 1 << E
> ++ BIT(E)
> +
> + at depends on hasbitops && usesbit@
> +expression E;
> +@@
> +
> +- BIT((E))
> ++ BIT(E)
>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [Cocci] [PATCH v2 1/1] scripts/coccinelle: use BIT macro if used
@ 2014-04-29 16:18 ` Lars-Peter Clausen
0 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Lars-Peter Clausen @ 2014-04-29 16:18 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Javier Martinez Canillas; +Cc: Julia Lawall, Michal Marek, linux-kernel, cocci
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 <javier@dowhile0.org>
I don't think this should be enabled by default. It will generate a ton of
false positives, not everything that is 1 shifted by something is a
single-bit field. E.g. imagine a device with multi-bit fields:
#define FOOBAR_A (0 << FOOBAR_OFFSET)
#define FOOBAR_B (1 << FOOBAR_OFFSET)
#define FOOBAR_C (2 << FOOBAR_OFFSET)
#define FOOBAR_D (3 << FOOBAR_OFFSET)
The script will now suggest to replace FOOBAR_B (1 << FOOBAR_OFFSET) with
FOOBAR_B BIT(FOOBAR_OFFSET). Which is technically correct, but not semantically.
- Lars
> ---
>
> Changes since v1:
> - Add a rule that checks if the file is already using this macro
> as suggested by Julia Lawall
>
> scripts/coccinelle/api/bit.cocci | 30 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> 1 file changed, 30 insertions(+)
> create mode 100644 scripts/coccinelle/api/bit.cocci
>
> diff --git a/scripts/coccinelle/api/bit.cocci b/scripts/coccinelle/api/bit.cocci
> new file mode 100644
> index 0000000..a02cfd3
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/scripts/coccinelle/api/bit.cocci
> @@ -0,0 +1,30 @@
> +// Use the BIT() macro if is already used
> +//
> +// Confidence: High
> +// Copyright (C) 2014 Javier Martinez Canillas. GPLv2.
> +// URL: http://coccinelle.lip6.fr/
> +// Options: --include-headers
> +
> +@hasbitops@
> +@@
> +
> +#include <linux/bitops.h>
> +
> +@usesbit@
> +@@
> +
> +BIT(...)
> +
> +@depends on hasbitops && usesbit@
> +expression E;
> +@@
> +
> +- 1 << E
> ++ BIT(E)
> +
> +@depends on hasbitops && usesbit@
> +expression E;
> +@@
> +
> +- BIT((E))
> ++ BIT(E)
>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* [Cocci] [PATCH v2 1/1] scripts/coccinelle: use BIT macro if used
2014-04-29 16:18 ` Lars-Peter Clausen
@ 2014-04-30 12:05 ` Javier Martinez Canillas
-1 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Javier Martinez Canillas @ 2014-04-30 12:05 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: cocci
Hello Lars,
On Tue, Apr 29, 2014 at 6:18 PM, Lars-Peter Clausen <lars@metafoo.de> wrote:
> 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 <javier@dowhile0.org>
>
>
> I don't think this should be enabled by default. It will generate a ton of
> false positives, not everything that is 1 shifted by something is a
> single-bit field. E.g. imagine a device with multi-bit fields:
>
> #define FOOBAR_A (0 << FOOBAR_OFFSET)
> #define FOOBAR_B (1 << FOOBAR_OFFSET)
> #define FOOBAR_C (2 << FOOBAR_OFFSET)
> #define FOOBAR_D (3 << FOOBAR_OFFSET)
>
> The script will now suggest to replace FOOBAR_B (1 << FOOBAR_OFFSET) with
> FOOBAR_B BIT(FOOBAR_OFFSET). Which is technically correct, but not
> semantically.
>
> - Lars
>
>
Thanks a lot for your feedback. You are complete right that this is
hard to generalize so is better to just drop this patch.
I'll just continue it keeping it on my tree since I find it useful.
Best regards,
Javier
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [Cocci] [PATCH v2 1/1] scripts/coccinelle: use BIT macro if used
@ 2014-04-30 12:05 ` Javier Martinez Canillas
0 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Javier Martinez Canillas @ 2014-04-30 12:05 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Lars-Peter Clausen; +Cc: Julia Lawall, Michal Marek, Linux Kernel, Coccinelle
Hello Lars,
On Tue, Apr 29, 2014 at 6:18 PM, Lars-Peter Clausen <lars@metafoo.de> wrote:
> 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 <javier@dowhile0.org>
>
>
> I don't think this should be enabled by default. It will generate a ton of
> false positives, not everything that is 1 shifted by something is a
> single-bit field. E.g. imagine a device with multi-bit fields:
>
> #define FOOBAR_A (0 << FOOBAR_OFFSET)
> #define FOOBAR_B (1 << FOOBAR_OFFSET)
> #define FOOBAR_C (2 << FOOBAR_OFFSET)
> #define FOOBAR_D (3 << FOOBAR_OFFSET)
>
> The script will now suggest to replace FOOBAR_B (1 << FOOBAR_OFFSET) with
> FOOBAR_B BIT(FOOBAR_OFFSET). Which is technically correct, but not
> semantically.
>
> - Lars
>
>
Thanks a lot for your feedback. You are complete right that this is
hard to generalize so is better to just drop this patch.
I'll just continue it keeping it on my tree since I find it useful.
Best regards,
Javier
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2014-04-30 12:05 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2014-04-27 10:50 [Cocci] [PATCH v2 1/1] scripts/coccinelle: use BIT macro if used Javier Martinez Canillas
2014-04-27 10:50 ` Javier Martinez Canillas
2014-04-29 16:18 ` [Cocci] " Lars-Peter Clausen
2014-04-29 16:18 ` Lars-Peter Clausen
2014-04-30 12:05 ` Javier Martinez Canillas
2014-04-30 12:05 ` Javier Martinez Canillas
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.