Re: [cocci] Searching for lock calls without unlocking (with SmPL)?

[Markus Elfring <Markus.Elfring@web.de>]

>>>> May I expect that only a single call should be marked for such a test case?
>>>
>>> No, I already explained why two calls are marked.
>>
>> I see further challenges with this explanation approach.
>>
>>
>>> The shortest path constraint is that for A ... B, the ... doesn't contain
>>> A or B.
>>
>> This is generally fine.

How does the “shortest path” fit to the statement “action_lock(&blockage2);”
from the if branch in your software view?

Can the path distance be determined anyhow?


>>>          It doesn't mean that the rule can't match at multiple places in
>>> the function.
>>
>> I find that this information will need further clarifications.
> 
> Coccinelle considers every node in the control-flow graph and checks
> whether the pattern can be matched at that point.  Each mach is
> independent.  There is no guarantee that one match will not cross another
> one.  Furthermore, (just in case this is the concern) when you mentin two
> different metavariables, there is no guarantee that they are not bound to
> the same term.

I am looking for further clarifications also according to such general information.
How will related technical details be represented in an improved software documentation?

Will it become more desirable to distinguish metavariable contents in an unique way?

Regards,
Markus