[Cocci] [PATCH v2 0/3] Coccinelle: misc: Improve the script for more accurate results

[Cocci] [PATCH v2 0/3] Coccinelle: misc: Improve the script for more accurate results

[Vaishali Thakkar]

Few changes to improve the results given by the irqf_oneshot.cocci:

- Change in the matching rules to eliminate false postives in the
  patch mode
- Change in the context mode to eliminate false postives in the
  context mode
- Support for the missing devm_request_threaded_irq in context, report
  and org mode


Vaishali Thakkar (3):
  Coccinelle: misc: Improve the matching of rules
  Coccinelle: misc: Improve the result given by context mode
  Coccinelle: misc: Add support for devm variant in all modes

 scripts/coccinelle/misc/irqf_oneshot.cocci | 42 ++++++++++++++++++++++++------
 1 file changed, 34 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)

-- 
2.1.4

[Cocci] [PATCH v2 3/3] Coccinelle: misc: Add support for devm variant in all modes

[Vaishali Thakkar]

Add missing support for the devm_request_threaded_irq in
the rules of context, report and org modes.

Misc:
----
To be consistent with other scripts, change confidence level
of the script to 'Moderate'.

Signed-off-by: Vaishali Thakkar <vaishali.thakkar@oracle.com>
---
 scripts/coccinelle/misc/irqf_oneshot.cocci | 10 +++++++++-
 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/scripts/coccinelle/misc/irqf_oneshot.cocci b/scripts/coccinelle/misc/irqf_oneshot.cocci
index 03b748d..f6c93fd 100644
--- a/scripts/coccinelle/misc/irqf_oneshot.cocci
+++ b/scripts/coccinelle/misc/irqf_oneshot.cocci
@@ -5,7 +5,7 @@
 /// So pass the IRQF_ONESHOT flag in this case.
 ///
 //
-// Confidence: Good
+// Confidence: Moderate
 // Comments:
 // Options: --no-includes
 
@@ -89,13 +89,21 @@ devm_request_threaded_irq at p(dev, irq, NULL, thread_fn,
 @depends on context@
 position p != {r1.p,r2.p};
 @@
+(
 *request_threaded_irq at p(irq, NULL, ...)
+|
+*devm_request_threaded_irq at p(dev, irq, NULL, ...)
+)
 
 @match depends on report || org@
 expression irq;
 position p != {r1.p,r2.p};
 @@
+(
 request_threaded_irq at p(irq, NULL, ...)
+|
+devm_request_threaded_irq at p(dev, irq, NULL, ...)
+)
 
 @script:python depends on org@
 p << match.p;
-- 
2.1.4

[Cocci] [PATCH v2 3/3] Coccinelle: misc: Add support for devm variant in all modes

[Vaishali Thakkar]

On Sunday 16 October 2016 10:37 PM, Vaishali Thakkar wrote:
> Add missing support for the devm_request_threaded_irq in
> the rules of context, report and org modes.
> 
> Misc:
> ----
> To be consistent with other scripts, change confidence level
> of the script to 'Moderate'.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Vaishali Thakkar <vaishali.thakkar@oracle.com>
> ---
>  scripts/coccinelle/misc/irqf_oneshot.cocci | 10 +++++++++-
>  1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/scripts/coccinelle/misc/irqf_oneshot.cocci b/scripts/coccinelle/misc/irqf_oneshot.cocci
> index 03b748d..f6c93fd 100644
> --- a/scripts/coccinelle/misc/irqf_oneshot.cocci
> +++ b/scripts/coccinelle/misc/irqf_oneshot.cocci
> @@ -5,7 +5,7 @@
>  /// So pass the IRQF_ONESHOT flag in this case.
>  ///
>  //
> -// Confidence: Good
> +// Confidence: Moderate
>  // Comments:
>  // Options: --no-includes
>  
> @@ -89,13 +89,21 @@ devm_request_threaded_irq at p(dev, irq, NULL, thread_fn,
>  @depends on context@
>  position p != {r1.p,r2.p};
>  @@
> +(
>  *request_threaded_irq at p(irq, NULL, ...)
> +|
> +*devm_request_threaded_irq at p(dev, irq, NULL, ...)
> +)
>  
>  @match depends on report || org@
>  expression irq;
>  position p != {r1.p,r2.p};
>  @@
> +(
>  request_threaded_irq at p(irq, NULL, ...)
> +|
> +devm_request_threaded_irq at p(dev, irq, NULL, ...)
> +)

Oh, my bad here. :(

Forgot the initialization of meta variables for the
arguments.

But I am wondering why coccicheck didn't fail here.
Isn't it suppose to give parsing errors? Or it doesn't
do that?

In any case, I am sorry for this. I'll send the revised
version of the patches.
 
>  @script:python depends on org@
>  p << match.p;
> 

-- 
Vaishali

[Cocci] [PATCH v2 3/3] Coccinelle: misc: Add support for devm variant in all modes

[Vaishali Thakkar]

On Sunday 16 October 2016 10:37 PM, Vaishali Thakkar wrote:
> Add missing support for the devm_request_threaded_irq in
> the rules of context, report and org modes.
> 
> Misc:
> ----
> To be consistent with other scripts, change confidence level
> of the script to 'Moderate'.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Vaishali Thakkar <vaishali.thakkar@oracle.com>
> ---
>  scripts/coccinelle/misc/irqf_oneshot.cocci | 10 +++++++++-
>  1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/scripts/coccinelle/misc/irqf_oneshot.cocci b/scripts/coccinelle/misc/irqf_oneshot.cocci
> index 03b748d..f6c93fd 100644
> --- a/scripts/coccinelle/misc/irqf_oneshot.cocci
> +++ b/scripts/coccinelle/misc/irqf_oneshot.cocci
> @@ -5,7 +5,7 @@
>  /// So pass the IRQF_ONESHOT flag in this case.
>  ///
>  //
> -// Confidence: Good
> +// Confidence: Moderate
>  // Comments:
>  // Options: --no-includes
>  
> @@ -89,13 +89,21 @@ devm_request_threaded_irq at p(dev, irq, NULL, thread_fn,
>  @depends on context@
>  position p != {r1.p,r2.p};
>  @@
> +(
>  *request_threaded_irq at p(irq, NULL, ...)
> +|
> +*devm_request_threaded_irq at p(dev, irq, NULL, ...)
> +)
>  
>  @match depends on report || org@
>  expression irq;
>  position p != {r1.p,r2.p};
>  @@
> +(
>  request_threaded_irq at p(irq, NULL, ...)
> +|
> +devm_request_threaded_irq at p(dev, irq, NULL, ...)
> +)

Oh, my bad here. :(

Forgot the initialization of meta variables for the
arguments.

But I am wondering why coccicheck didn't fail here.
Isn't it suppose to give parsing errors? Or it doesn't
do that?

In any case, I am sorry for this. I'll send the revised
version of the patches.
  
>  @script:python depends on org@
>  p << match.p;
> 

-- 
Vaishali

[Cocci] [PATCH v2 3/3] Coccinelle: misc: Add support for devm variant in all modes

[Julia Lawall]

On Tue, 18 Oct 2016, Vaishali Thakkar wrote:

>
>
> On Sunday 16 October 2016 10:37 PM, Vaishali Thakkar wrote:
> > Add missing support for the devm_request_threaded_irq in
> > the rules of context, report and org modes.
> >
> > Misc:
> > ----
> > To be consistent with other scripts, change confidence level
> > of the script to 'Moderate'.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Vaishali Thakkar <vaishali.thakkar@oracle.com>
> > ---
> >  scripts/coccinelle/misc/irqf_oneshot.cocci | 10 +++++++++-
> >  1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/scripts/coccinelle/misc/irqf_oneshot.cocci b/scripts/coccinelle/misc/irqf_oneshot.cocci
> > index 03b748d..f6c93fd 100644
> > --- a/scripts/coccinelle/misc/irqf_oneshot.cocci
> > +++ b/scripts/coccinelle/misc/irqf_oneshot.cocci
> > @@ -5,7 +5,7 @@
> >  /// So pass the IRQF_ONESHOT flag in this case.
> >  ///
> >  //
> > -// Confidence: Good
> > +// Confidence: Moderate
> >  // Comments:
> >  // Options: --no-includes
> >
> > @@ -89,13 +89,21 @@ devm_request_threaded_irq at p(dev, irq, NULL, thread_fn,
> >  @depends on context@
> >  position p != {r1.p,r2.p};
> >  @@
> > +(
> >  *request_threaded_irq at p(irq, NULL, ...)
> > +|
> > +*devm_request_threaded_irq at p(dev, irq, NULL, ...)
> > +)
> >
> >  @match depends on report || org@
> >  expression irq;
> >  position p != {r1.p,r2.p};
> >  @@
> > +(
> >  request_threaded_irq at p(irq, NULL, ...)
> > +|
> > +devm_request_threaded_irq at p(dev, irq, NULL, ...)
> > +)
>
> Oh, my bad here. :(
>
> Forgot the initialization of meta variables for the
> arguments.
>
> But I am wondering why coccicheck didn't fail here.
> Isn't it suppose to give parsing errors? Or it doesn't
> do that?

It just give a warning, which I guess make coccicheck hides.  It is
allowed to require an argument to be named dev, although it is nicer if
one declares it with symbol in that case.

julia

>
> In any case, I am sorry for this. I'll send the revised
> version of the patches.
>
> >  @script:python depends on org@
> >  p << match.p;
> >
>
> --
> Vaishali
>

[Cocci] [PATCH v2 3/3] Coccinelle: misc: Add support for devm variant in all modes

[Vaishali Thakkar]

On Tuesday 18 October 2016 10:40 PM, Julia Lawall wrote:
> 
> 
> On Tue, 18 Oct 2016, Vaishali Thakkar wrote:
> 
>>
>>
>> On Sunday 16 October 2016 10:37 PM, Vaishali Thakkar wrote:
>>> Add missing support for the devm_request_threaded_irq in
>>> the rules of context, report and org modes.
>>>
>>> Misc:
>>> ----
>>> To be consistent with other scripts, change confidence level
>>> of the script to 'Moderate'.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Vaishali Thakkar <vaishali.thakkar@oracle.com>
>>> ---
>>>  scripts/coccinelle/misc/irqf_oneshot.cocci | 10 +++++++++-
>>>  1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/scripts/coccinelle/misc/irqf_oneshot.cocci b/scripts/coccinelle/misc/irqf_oneshot.cocci
>>> index 03b748d..f6c93fd 100644
>>> --- a/scripts/coccinelle/misc/irqf_oneshot.cocci
>>> +++ b/scripts/coccinelle/misc/irqf_oneshot.cocci
>>> @@ -5,7 +5,7 @@
>>>  /// So pass the IRQF_ONESHOT flag in this case.
>>>  ///
>>>  //
>>> -// Confidence: Good
>>> +// Confidence: Moderate
>>>  // Comments:
>>>  // Options: --no-includes
>>>
>>> @@ -89,13 +89,21 @@ devm_request_threaded_irq at p(dev, irq, NULL, thread_fn,
>>>  @depends on context@
>>>  position p != {r1.p,r2.p};
>>>  @@
>>> +(
>>>  *request_threaded_irq at p(irq, NULL, ...)
>>> +|
>>> +*devm_request_threaded_irq at p(dev, irq, NULL, ...)
>>> +)
>>>
>>>  @match depends on report || org@
>>>  expression irq;
>>>  position p != {r1.p,r2.p};
>>>  @@
>>> +(
>>>  request_threaded_irq at p(irq, NULL, ...)
>>> +|
>>> +devm_request_threaded_irq at p(dev, irq, NULL, ...)
>>> +)
>>
>> Oh, my bad here. :(
>>
>> Forgot the initialization of meta variables for the
>> arguments.
>>
>> But I am wondering why coccicheck didn't fail here.
>> Isn't it suppose to give parsing errors? Or it doesn't
>> do that?
> 
> It just give a warning, which I guess make coccicheck hides.  It is
> allowed to require an argument to be named dev, although it is nicer if
> one declares it with symbol in that case.

Ah, ok. The results were based on the names 'irq, dev etc', not on the
assumption for metavariables.
 
> julia
> 
>>
>> In any case, I am sorry for this. I'll send the revised
>> version of the patches.
>>
>>>  @script:python depends on org@
>>>  p << match.p;
>>>
>>
>> --
>> Vaishali
>>

-- 
Vaishali

[Cocci] [PATCH v2 1/3] Coccinelle: misc: Improve the matching of rules

[Vaishali Thakkar]

Currently because of the left associativity of the operators, pattern
IRQF_ONESHOT | flags does not match with the pattern when we have more
than one flag after the disjunction. This eventually results in giving
false positives by the script. This patch eliminates these FPs by
improving the rule.

Signed-off-by: Vaishali Thakkar <vaishali.thakkar@oracle.com>
---
 scripts/coccinelle/misc/irqf_oneshot.cocci | 30 ++++++++++++++++++++++++------
 1 file changed, 24 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)

diff --git a/scripts/coccinelle/misc/irqf_oneshot.cocci b/scripts/coccinelle/misc/irqf_oneshot.cocci
index b421150..b538d08 100644
--- a/scripts/coccinelle/misc/irqf_oneshot.cocci
+++ b/scripts/coccinelle/misc/irqf_oneshot.cocci
@@ -18,13 +18,12 @@ virtual report
 expression dev;
 expression irq;
 expression thread_fn;
-expression flags;
 position p;
 @@
 (
 request_threaded_irq at p(irq, NULL, thread_fn,
 (
-flags | IRQF_ONESHOT
+IRQF_ONESHOT | ...
 |
 IRQF_ONESHOT
 )
@@ -32,20 +31,39 @@ IRQF_ONESHOT
 |
 devm_request_threaded_irq at p(dev, irq, NULL, thread_fn,
 (
-flags | IRQF_ONESHOT
+IRQF_ONESHOT | ...
 |
 IRQF_ONESHOT
 )
 , ...)
 )
 
- at depends on patch@
+ at r2@
 expression dev;
 expression irq;
 expression thread_fn;
 expression flags;
+expression ret;
 position p != r1.p;
 @@
+flags = IRQF_ONESHOT | ...;
+(
+ret = request_threaded_irq at p(irq, NULL, thread_fn, flags, ...);
+|
+ret = devm_request_threaded_irq at p(dev, irq, NULL, thread_fn, flags, ...);
+|
+return request_threaded_irq at p(irq, NULL, thread_fn, flags, ...);
+|
+return devm_request_threaded_irq at p(dev, irq, NULL, thread_fn, flags, ...);
+)
+
+ at depends on patch@
+expression dev;
+expression irq;
+expression thread_fn;
+expression flags;
+position p != {r1.p,r2.p};
+@@
 (
 request_threaded_irq at p(irq, NULL, thread_fn,
 (
@@ -69,13 +87,13 @@ devm_request_threaded_irq at p(dev, irq, NULL, thread_fn,
 )
 
 @depends on context@
-position p != r1.p;
+position p != {r1.p,r2.p};
 @@
 *request_threaded_irq at p(...)
 
 @match depends on report || org@
 expression irq;
-position p != r1.p;
+position p != {r1.p,r2.p};
 @@
 request_threaded_irq at p(irq, NULL, ...)
 
-- 
2.1.4

[Cocci] [PATCH v2 1/3] Coccinelle: misc: Improve the matching of rules

[SF Markus Elfring]

Dear Vaishali,

You sent an update suggestion for the source file ?scripts/coccinelle/misc/irqf_oneshot.cocci?
on 2016-10-16.

It contained a patch hunk like the following.


@@ -32,20 +31,39 @@ IRQF_ONESHOT
 |
 devm_request_threaded_irq at p(dev, irq, NULL, thread_fn,
 (
-flags | IRQF_ONESHOT
+IRQF_ONESHOT | ...
 |
 IRQF_ONESHOT
 )
 , ...)
 )
 
- at depends on patch@
+ at r2@
 expression dev;
 expression irq;
 expression thread_fn;
 expression flags;
+expression ret;
 position p != r1.p;
 @@
+flags = IRQF_ONESHOT | ...;
+(
+ret = request_threaded_irq at p(irq, NULL, thread_fn, flags, ...);
+|
+ret = devm_request_threaded_irq at p(dev, irq, NULL, thread_fn, flags, ...);
+|
+return request_threaded_irq at p(irq, NULL, thread_fn, flags, ...);
+|
+return devm_request_threaded_irq at p(dev, irq, NULL, thread_fn, flags, ...);
+)
+
+ at depends on patch@
+expression dev;
+expression irq;
+expression thread_fn;
+expression flags;
+position p != {r1.p,r2.p};
+@@
 (
 request_threaded_irq at p(irq, NULL, thread_fn,
 (


I have got a few ideas here.

1. Would you like to reduce the repetition of the SmPL key word ?expression??

2. How do you think about a bit more fine-tuning for the shown SmPL disjunction
   as follows?


+(
+ ret =
+(
+       request_threaded_irq at p(irq, NULL, thread_fn, flags, ...)
+|
+       devm_request_threaded_irq at p(dev, irq, NULL, thread_fn, flags, ...)
+)
+ ;
+|
+ return
+(
+        request_threaded_irq at p(irq, NULL, thread_fn, flags, ...)
+|
+        devm_request_threaded_irq at p(dev, irq, NULL, thread_fn, flags, ...)
+)
+ ;
+)


Regards,
Markus

[Cocci] [PATCH v2 1/3] Coccinelle: misc: Improve the matching of rules

[Julia Lawall]

On Tue, 1 Nov 2016, SF Markus Elfring wrote:

> Dear Vaishali,
>
> You sent an update suggestion for the source file ?scripts/coccinelle/misc/irqf_oneshot.cocci?
> on 2016-10-16.
>
> It contained a patch hunk like the following.
>
>
> @@ -32,20 +31,39 @@ IRQF_ONESHOT
>  |
>  devm_request_threaded_irq at p(dev, irq, NULL, thread_fn,
>  (
> -flags | IRQF_ONESHOT
> +IRQF_ONESHOT | ...
>  |
>  IRQF_ONESHOT
>  )
>  , ...)
>  )
>
> - at depends on patch@
> + at r2@
>  expression dev;
>  expression irq;
>  expression thread_fn;
>  expression flags;
> +expression ret;
>  position p != r1.p;
>  @@
> +flags = IRQF_ONESHOT | ...;
> +(
> +ret = request_threaded_irq at p(irq, NULL, thread_fn, flags, ...);
> +|
> +ret = devm_request_threaded_irq at p(dev, irq, NULL, thread_fn, flags, ...);
> +|
> +return request_threaded_irq at p(irq, NULL, thread_fn, flags, ...);
> +|
> +return devm_request_threaded_irq at p(dev, irq, NULL, thread_fn, flags, ...);
> +)
> +
> + at depends on patch@
> +expression dev;
> +expression irq;
> +expression thread_fn;
> +expression flags;
> +position p != {r1.p,r2.p};
> +@@
>  (
>  request_threaded_irq at p(irq, NULL, thread_fn,
>  (
>
>
> I have got a few ideas here.
>
> 1. Would you like to reduce the repetition of the SmPL key word ?expression??
>
> 2. How do you think about a bit more fine-tuning for the shown SmPL disjunction
>    as follows?

What do you mean by "a bit more fine-tuning"?  If you have a concrete
suggestion, then make it.  But don't make work for other people to guess
what you might mean.

julia


>
>
> +(
> + ret =
> +(
> +       request_threaded_irq at p(irq, NULL, thread_fn, flags, ...)
> +|
> +       devm_request_threaded_irq at p(dev, irq, NULL, thread_fn, flags, ...)
> +)
> + ;
> +|
> + return
> +(
> +        request_threaded_irq at p(irq, NULL, thread_fn, flags, ...)
> +|
> +        devm_request_threaded_irq at p(dev, irq, NULL, thread_fn, flags, ...)
> +)
> + ;
> +)
>
>
> Regards,
> Markus
> _______________________________________________
> Cocci mailing list
> Cocci at systeme.lip6.fr
> https://systeme.lip6.fr/mailman/listinfo/cocci
>

[Cocci] [PATCH v2 1/3] Coccinelle: misc: Improve the matching of rules

[SF Markus Elfring]

> What do you mean by "a bit more fine-tuning"?  If you have a concrete
> suggestion, then make it.  But don't make work for other people to guess
> what you might mean.

I hoped that the SmPL source code below would explain my update suggestion
in a sufficient way to use two smaller SmPL disjunctions.


>> +(
>> + ret =
>> +(
>> +       request_threaded_irq at p(irq, NULL, thread_fn, flags, ...)
>> +|
>> +       devm_request_threaded_irq at p(dev, irq, NULL, thread_fn, flags, ...)
>> +)
>> + ;
>> +|
>> + return
>> +(
>> +        request_threaded_irq at p(irq, NULL, thread_fn, flags, ...)
>> +|
>> +        devm_request_threaded_irq at p(dev, irq, NULL, thread_fn, flags, ...)
>> +)
>> + ;
>> +)

Regards,
Markus

[Cocci] [PATCH v2 1/3] Coccinelle: misc: Improve the matching of rules

[Julia Lawall]

On Tue, 1 Nov 2016, SF Markus Elfring wrote:

> > What do you mean by "a bit more fine-tuning"?  If you have a concrete
> > suggestion, then make it.  But don't make work for other people to guess
> > what you might mean.
>
> I hoped that the SmPL source code below would explain my update suggestion
> in a sufficient way to use two smaller SmPL disjunctions.

Sorry, I thought it was the original code, and didn't realize that it was
the suggestion..

But I don't think that the suggestion improves readability in any way.
Coccinelle disjunctions also float up to the statement level anyway, so
the semantic patch that is actually applied to the code is the same in
either case.

julia


>
>
> >> +(
> >> + ret =
> >> +(
> >> +       request_threaded_irq at p(irq, NULL, thread_fn, flags, ...)
> >> +|
> >> +       devm_request_threaded_irq at p(dev, irq, NULL, thread_fn, flags, ...)
> >> +)
> >> + ;
> >> +|
> >> + return
> >> +(
> >> +        request_threaded_irq at p(irq, NULL, thread_fn, flags, ...)
> >> +|
> >> +        devm_request_threaded_irq at p(dev, irq, NULL, thread_fn, flags, ...)
> >> +)
> >> + ;
> >> +)
>
> Regards,
> Markus
>

[Cocci] [PATCH v2 1/3] Coccinelle: misc: Improve the matching of rules

[SF Markus Elfring]

> Sorry, I thought it was the original code, and didn't realize that it was
> the suggestion..
> 
> But I don't think that the suggestion improves readability in any way.

I hoped that my SmPL script variant could influence the execution characteristics
in positive ways.


> Coccinelle disjunctions also float up to the statement level anyway,

I do not really understand this information at the moment.


> so the semantic patch that is actually applied to the code is the same in
> either case.

I assumed that the reduced code repetition could result in a desired effect.


>>>> +(
>>>> + ret =
>>>> +(
>>>> +       request_threaded_irq at p(irq, NULL, thread_fn, flags, ...)
>>>> +|
>>>> +       devm_request_threaded_irq at p(dev, irq, NULL, thread_fn, flags, ...)
>>>> +)
>>>> + ;
>>>> +|
>>>> + return
>>>> +(
>>>> +        request_threaded_irq at p(irq, NULL, thread_fn, flags, ...)
>>>> +|
>>>> +        devm_request_threaded_irq at p(dev, irq, NULL, thread_fn, flags, ...)
>>>> +)
>>>> + ;
>>>> +)

Regards,
Markus

[Cocci] Coccinelle: misc: Improve the matching of rules

[SF Markus Elfring]

>> I assumed that the reduced code repetition could result in a desired effect.
> 
> Incorrect on all points.

I wonder then why the Coccinelle software would not benefit from the
specification of common parts in two similar SmPL disjunctions.

Regards,
Markus

[Cocci] [PATCH v2 2/3] Coccinelle: misc: Improve the result given by context mode

[Vaishali Thakkar]

To eliminate false positives given by the context mode, add
necessary arguments for the function request_threaded_irq.

Signed-off-by: Vaishali Thakkar <vaishali.thakkar@oracle.com>
---
 scripts/coccinelle/misc/irqf_oneshot.cocci | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/scripts/coccinelle/misc/irqf_oneshot.cocci b/scripts/coccinelle/misc/irqf_oneshot.cocci
index b538d08..03b748d 100644
--- a/scripts/coccinelle/misc/irqf_oneshot.cocci
+++ b/scripts/coccinelle/misc/irqf_oneshot.cocci
@@ -89,7 +89,7 @@ devm_request_threaded_irq at p(dev, irq, NULL, thread_fn,
 @depends on context@
 position p != {r1.p,r2.p};
 @@
-*request_threaded_irq at p(...)
+*request_threaded_irq at p(irq, NULL, ...)
 
 @match depends on report || org@
 expression irq;
-- 
2.1.4

[Cocci] [PATCH v2 0/3] Coccinelle: misc: Improve the script for more accurate results

[Julia Lawall]

I get the following in patch mode that I don't get in context mode:

diff -u -p a/drivers/power/supply/tps65090-charger.c
b/drivers/power/supply/tps\
65090-charger.c
--- a/drivers/power/supply/tps65090-charger.c
+++ b/drivers/power/supply/tps65090-charger.c
@@ -311,7 +311,8 @@ static int tps65090_charger_probe(struct

	if (irq != -ENXIO) {
		ret = devm_request_threaded_irq(&pdev->dev, irq, NULL,
-                       tps65090_charger_isr, 0, "tps65090-charger", cdata);
+                       tps65090_charger_isr, IRQF_ONESHOT,
+                       "tps65090-charger", cdata);
		if (ret) {
                        dev_err(cdata->dev,
				"Unable to register irq %d err %d\n", irq,


julia

[Cocci] [PATCH v2 0/3] Coccinelle: misc: Improve the script for more accurate results

[Vaishali Thakkar]

On Tuesday 18 October 2016 10:04 PM, Julia Lawall wrote:
> I get the following in patch mode that I don't get in context mode:

Hi,

Are you getting same number of devm cases in your report for the context
and patch mode? [except this case]


> diff -u -p a/drivers/power/supply/tps65090-charger.c
> b/drivers/power/supply/tps\
> 65090-charger.c
> --- a/drivers/power/supply/tps65090-charger.c
> +++ b/drivers/power/supply/tps65090-charger.c
> @@ -311,7 +311,8 @@ static int tps65090_charger_probe(struct
> 
> 	if (irq != -ENXIO) {
> 		ret = devm_request_threaded_irq(&pdev->dev, irq, NULL,
> -                       tps65090_charger_isr, 0, "tps65090-charger", cdata);
> +                       tps65090_charger_isr, IRQF_ONESHOT,
> +                       "tps65090-charger", cdata);
> 		if (ret) {
>                         dev_err(cdata->dev,
> 				"Unable to register irq %d err %d\n", irq,
> 
> 
> julia
> 

-- 
Vaishali

[Cocci] [PATCH v2 0/3] Coccinelle: misc: Improve the script for more accurate results

[Julia Lawall]

On Tue, 18 Oct 2016, Vaishali Thakkar wrote:

>
>
> On Tuesday 18 October 2016 10:04 PM, Julia Lawall wrote:
> > I get the following in patch mode that I don't get in context mode:
>
> Hi,
>
> Are you getting same number of devm cases in your report for the context
> and patch mode? [except this case]

The only devm case I get in context mode is:

diff -u -p /var/linuxes/linux-next/drivers/acpi/evged.c
/tmp/nothing/drivers/ac\
pi/evged.c
--- /var/linuxes/linux-next/drivers/acpi/evged.c
+++ /tmp/nothing/drivers/acpi/evged.c
@@ -116,8 +116,6 @@ static acpi_status acpi_ged_request_inte
        if (r.flags & IORESOURCE_IRQ_SHAREABLE)
                irqflags |= IRQF_SHARED;

-       if (devm_request_threaded_irq(dev, irq, NULL, acpi_ged_irq_handler,
-                                     irqflags, "ACPI:Ged", event)) {
                dev_err(dev, "failed to setup event handler for irq %u\n", irq);
                return AE_ERROR;
        }

This one has the property that the first argument is an identifier.  The
other cases seem to have a & expression.  There are around 20 of them.

julia



>
>
> > diff -u -p a/drivers/power/supply/tps65090-charger.c
> > b/drivers/power/supply/tps\
> > 65090-charger.c
> > --- a/drivers/power/supply/tps65090-charger.c
> > +++ b/drivers/power/supply/tps65090-charger.c
> > @@ -311,7 +311,8 @@ static int tps65090_charger_probe(struct
> >
> > 	if (irq != -ENXIO) {
> > 		ret = devm_request_threaded_irq(&pdev->dev, irq, NULL,
> > -                       tps65090_charger_isr, 0, "tps65090-charger", cdata);
> > +                       tps65090_charger_isr, IRQF_ONESHOT,
> > +                       "tps65090-charger", cdata);
> > 		if (ret) {
> >                         dev_err(cdata->dev,
> > 				"Unable to register irq %d err %d\n", irq,
> >
> >
> > julia
> >
>
> --
> Vaishali
>

[Cocci] [PATCH v2 0/3] Coccinelle: misc: Improve the script for more accurate results

[Vaishali Thakkar]

On Tuesday 18 October 2016 10:31 PM, Julia Lawall wrote:
> 
> 
> On Tue, 18 Oct 2016, Vaishali Thakkar wrote:
> 
>>
>>
>> On Tuesday 18 October 2016 10:04 PM, Julia Lawall wrote:
>>> I get the following in patch mode that I don't get in context mode:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> Are you getting same number of devm cases in your report for the context
>> and patch mode? [except this case]
> 
> The only devm case I get in context mode is:
> 
> diff -u -p /var/linuxes/linux-next/drivers/acpi/evged.c
> /tmp/nothing/drivers/ac\
> pi/evged.c
> --- /var/linuxes/linux-next/drivers/acpi/evged.c
> +++ /tmp/nothing/drivers/acpi/evged.c
> @@ -116,8 +116,6 @@ static acpi_status acpi_ged_request_inte
>         if (r.flags & IORESOURCE_IRQ_SHAREABLE)
>                 irqflags |= IRQF_SHARED;
> 
> -       if (devm_request_threaded_irq(dev, irq, NULL, acpi_ged_irq_handler,
> -                                     irqflags, "ACPI:Ged", event)) {
>                 dev_err(dev, "failed to setup event handler for irq %u\n", irq);
>                 return AE_ERROR;
>         }
> 
> This one has the property that the first argument is an identifier.  The
> other cases seem to have a & expression.  There are around 20 of them.

Although I got the issue with the patches, I am wondering why even context mode
gave result for the identifiers even though they are not initialized? Does that
mean it automatically assumes the type of meta variables even though they are not
initialized? I think spatch gives warnings for such cases. But I am not sure about
the coccicheck.
 
> julia
> 
> 
> 
>>
>>
>>> diff -u -p a/drivers/power/supply/tps65090-charger.c
>>> b/drivers/power/supply/tps\
>>> 65090-charger.c
>>> --- a/drivers/power/supply/tps65090-charger.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/power/supply/tps65090-charger.c
>>> @@ -311,7 +311,8 @@ static int tps65090_charger_probe(struct
>>>
>>> 	if (irq != -ENXIO) {
>>> 		ret = devm_request_threaded_irq(&pdev->dev, irq, NULL,
>>> -                       tps65090_charger_isr, 0, "tps65090-charger", cdata);
>>> +                       tps65090_charger_isr, IRQF_ONESHOT,
>>> +                       "tps65090-charger", cdata);
>>> 		if (ret) {
>>>                         dev_err(cdata->dev,
>>> 				"Unable to register irq %d err %d\n", irq,
>>>
>>>
>>> julia
>>>
>>
>> --
>> Vaishali
>>

-- 
Vaishali

[Cocci] [PATCH v2 0/3] Coccinelle: misc: Improve the script for more accurate results

[Julia Lawall]

On Tue, 18 Oct 2016, Vaishali Thakkar wrote:

>
>
> On Tuesday 18 October 2016 10:31 PM, Julia Lawall wrote:
> >
> >
> > On Tue, 18 Oct 2016, Vaishali Thakkar wrote:
> >
> >>
> >>
> >> On Tuesday 18 October 2016 10:04 PM, Julia Lawall wrote:
> >>> I get the following in patch mode that I don't get in context mode:
> >>
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> Are you getting same number of devm cases in your report for the context
> >> and patch mode? [except this case]
> >
> > The only devm case I get in context mode is:
> >
> > diff -u -p /var/linuxes/linux-next/drivers/acpi/evged.c
> > /tmp/nothing/drivers/ac\
> > pi/evged.c
> > --- /var/linuxes/linux-next/drivers/acpi/evged.c
> > +++ /tmp/nothing/drivers/acpi/evged.c
> > @@ -116,8 +116,6 @@ static acpi_status acpi_ged_request_inte
> >         if (r.flags & IORESOURCE_IRQ_SHAREABLE)
> >                 irqflags |= IRQF_SHARED;
> >
> > -       if (devm_request_threaded_irq(dev, irq, NULL, acpi_ged_irq_handler,
> > -                                     irqflags, "ACPI:Ged", event)) {
> >                 dev_err(dev, "failed to setup event handler for irq %u\n", irq);
> >                 return AE_ERROR;
> >         }
> >
> > This one has the property that the first argument is an identifier.  The
> > other cases seem to have a & expression.  There are around 20 of them.
>
> Although I got the issue with the patches, I am wondering why even context mode
> gave result for the identifiers even though they are not initialized? Does that
> mean it automatically assumes the type of meta variables even though they are not
> initialized? I think spatch gives warnings for such cases. But I am not sure about
> the coccicheck.

I think that there are a few cases where the names are the ones you chose.

julia


>
> > julia
> >
> >
> >
> >>
> >>
> >>> diff -u -p a/drivers/power/supply/tps65090-charger.c
> >>> b/drivers/power/supply/tps\
> >>> 65090-charger.c
> >>> --- a/drivers/power/supply/tps65090-charger.c
> >>> +++ b/drivers/power/supply/tps65090-charger.c
> >>> @@ -311,7 +311,8 @@ static int tps65090_charger_probe(struct
> >>>
> >>> 	if (irq != -ENXIO) {
> >>> 		ret = devm_request_threaded_irq(&pdev->dev, irq, NULL,
> >>> -                       tps65090_charger_isr, 0, "tps65090-charger", cdata);
> >>> +                       tps65090_charger_isr, IRQF_ONESHOT,
> >>> +                       "tps65090-charger", cdata);
> >>> 		if (ret) {
> >>>                         dev_err(cdata->dev,
> >>> 				"Unable to register irq %d err %d\n", irq,
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> julia
> >>>
> >>
> >> --
> >> Vaishali
> >>
>
> --
> Vaishali
>