From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: julia.lawall@lip6.fr (Julia Lawall) Date: Fri, 15 Mar 2013 23:16:31 +0100 (CET) Subject: [Cocci] "virtual rule patch not supported" In-Reply-To: References: <513D94DC.9090708@inria.fr> <51433832.1010906@inria.fr> Message-ID: To: cocci@systeme.lip6.fr List-Id: cocci@systeme.lip6.fr On Fri, 15 Mar 2013, Nicolas Palix wrote: > Alternatively, you could use 'make coccicheck MODE=report' as every > cocci file currently provide at least this mode > or we could swap patch and report for the chain mode. If you do that, it should be the same as report, because every semantic patch should provide report... julia > linux $ find scripts/coccinelle -name *.cocci | wc -l > 42 > npalix at lig-yttrium linux $ find scripts/coccinelle -name *.cocci -exec > grep -H 'virtual context' \{} \; | wc -l > 36 > npalix at lig-yttrium linux $ find scripts/coccinelle -name *.cocci -exec > grep -H 'virtual report' \{} \; | wc -l > 42 > npalix at lig-yttrium linux $ find scripts/coccinelle -name *.cocci -exec > grep -H 'virtual org' \{} \; | wc -l > 40 > npalix at lig-yttrium linux $ find scripts/coccinelle -name *.cocci -exec > grep -H 'virtual patch' \{} \; | wc -l > 24 > > On Fri, Mar 15, 2013 at 4:11 PM, Nicolas Palix wrote: > > On Fri, Mar 15, 2013 at 4:03 PM, Brice Goglin wrote: > >> Le 15/03/2013 15:49, Nicolas Palix a ?crit : > >>> Hi, > >>> > >>> On Wed, Mar 13, 2013 at 9:47 AM, Julia Lawall wrote: > >>>> On Mon, 11 Mar 2013, Brice Goglin wrote: > >>>> > >>>>> Hello, > >>>>> I am running the kernel 3.9-rc2 coccicheck script on some of my module, > >>>>> and I get the following message: > >>>>> virtual rule patch not supported > >>>> I guess it doesn't crash? It is possible that some semantic patch just > >>>> doesn't support the patch option. I don't remember if it is possible to > >>>> specify several options, and to have them tried in order? That could be a > >>>> nice feature. If not, I think that there is an option that tries all of > >>>> the options in a fixed order. Nicolas? > >>>> > >>> According to the cocci files, every coccicheck mode could not be proposed. > >>> It is indeed some time impossible to propose a bug correction because > >>> several options are available for a single bug report and the semantic > >>> patch is not designed to choose one. > >>> > >>> The current basic modes are: patch, report, context, org > >>> The 'chain' mode tries the following mode is order: patch || report || > >>> context || org. > >>> Recently, the 'rep+ctxt' mode have been added for report and context modes. > >>> > >>> If you haven't specify the mode, it defaults to chain. The patch mode > >>> is thus tried first. > >>> If it fails, coccicheck falls back to the report mode. > >>> > >> > >> In short, this warning is harmless ? > > > > Indeed. But you will have various kind of output. > > > >> > >> Should it be disabled in the kernel by default ? Most people that uses > >> coccicheck in the kernel don't know much about it, and they don't write > >> the rules directly, so they may be afraid by the warning just like me. > > > > One may improve the handling of the chain mode, and skip unavailable > > modes instead of falling back to the next one in case of error... > > > > Do you volunteer ? > > > > By the way, thank you for the report. > > > >> > >> Brice > >> > > > > > > > > -- > > Nicolas Palix > > > > -- > Nicolas Palix >