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 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0F728C761A6 for ; Thu, 30 Mar 2023 18:23:47 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S230458AbjC3SXp (ORCPT ); Thu, 30 Mar 2023 14:23:45 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:54968 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S229585AbjC3SXo (ORCPT ); Thu, 30 Mar 2023 14:23:44 -0400 Received: from mail-yw1-x114a.google.com (mail-yw1-x114a.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::114a]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C6B5D5FEB for ; Thu, 30 Mar 2023 11:23:43 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-yw1-x114a.google.com with SMTP id 00721157ae682-5417f156cb9so197151867b3.8 for ; Thu, 30 Mar 2023 11:23:43 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20210112; t=1680200623; h=content-transfer-encoding:cc:to:from:subject:message-id :mime-version:date:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=z/xRrajGpNkA2EcVlcZeQoH7yJqIq4LsASpWqpVPEg0=; b=tV6CDKLGX1dK0lWzKIVc1ZIBqcYXaGUg8iP9Kcbawj8YF09HFswHZjsPHlD24TMqnU JCwZ8drFTD9rH3P3Bw2rkMa0QufMHHY8F8NYUulnY16dc8eOYfU0uC1JTAgMDJlmCaWx szCcuAn9EaTQgWWY/WWd0Y7mQSQUCPYgqAJegqGo2wKS+kKOMUuAhVCIoZnkultJd6+v zOVpUgnsz9vXT0V5mHfQnRNwXCw85yIcCfQA8bJHONkGIB+nEq1QUXMGZRG6BnSRxzp4 rO4N0SVuLmHoRPBSpA1ZFHxWVUiUrPQJxoAmRHowFqM0WOv52SfmHHWpGwEMK3QI9dWZ Q1dA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; t=1680200623; h=content-transfer-encoding:cc:to:from:subject:message-id :mime-version:date:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date :message-id:reply-to; bh=z/xRrajGpNkA2EcVlcZeQoH7yJqIq4LsASpWqpVPEg0=; b=0FbeUyloDAQMax3ejv5A0cdKeuSQbeRAGQ/B+Ha83u8q/IDKe706HrA9xaAVvDxoa3 5mTmKZnVTJ3qfSS22gGXqxuvJfN8+gQM7NalSn6UhsjqLngl4cEHLVUPm1wz38pj1HiL vy3sRVSeQUISB4m1+2J5mZIvupSp3WMas929wNWTQe83MKslN/tu839lAJMWSvEIphkA lU9+r2fVbNhiFsPhOFMuU6KhMJIdVFd/73Jck4zf0u3QJ5pdWTknKIBFldPXQ8hrA3ad QfY/s4bFE/c1JSeWyJZJGAQCrjdGeXPkif2dlwucm301HI51m80tov8PlZ/7AvZ08aHu lX1w== X-Gm-Message-State: AAQBX9cal1DUGnW40VC2zL21Gu6wH5SIU8AFLpxzDERIO4XyArD75mQ4 cIf+dkEIxRlzMZUMSV4WoElyS37TGT5zbwYiZf00R+nelPeNKp77TfO/RDpTecifrLSa5DWYND3 AZNjFqR2pypmP6CiVqQJVA+7RVmx4tZc1EdwWpwWObDI8gWIFbtrIIEhfA0KQRZQ= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AKy350bS6jqTfIbvXn+w6q5VL0E3wSDuLxWK0agB85otfAuu4L2+J9S3Y6gM7p/0ehvVRlU8mjpMzxDzN0w67A== X-Received: from chooglen.c.googlers.com ([fda3:e722:ac3:cc00:24:72f4:c0a8:3a07]) (user=chooglen job=sendgmr) by 2002:a05:6902:1009:b0:b6b:e967:920d with SMTP id w9-20020a056902100900b00b6be967920dmr13316427ybt.13.1680200622904; Thu, 30 Mar 2023 11:23:42 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 30 Mar 2023 11:23:40 -0700 Mime-Version: 1.0 Message-ID: Subject: How do we review changes made with coccinelle? From: Glen Choo To: git@vger.kernel.org Cc: Taylor Blau , "=?utf-8?B?w4Z2YXIgQXJuZmrDtnLDsA==?= Bjarmason" , Elijah Newren Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org =C3=86var recently sent a series that made pretty extensive use of coccinel= le to remove a lot of the_repository [1], but then we ended up in this weird spot where even though several reviewers thought the code changes looked good, we weren't sure about giving Reviewed-By because we didn't know coccinelle or how to review it. I'm pretty sure that the series could have been merged without a hitch if reviewers knew what to do about coccinelle. I expect more of these to appear as a result of the libification work, so it's probably a good time for us to figure out some norms about coccinelle :) Perhaps we could start the discussion by sharing thoughts on the following questions, which I'll summarize in a change to contrib/coccinelle/README (where we can do final bikeshedding): - Is it okay to give Reviewed-By on the basis of _just_ the in-tree changes and ignore the .cocci patch? - If not, what should reviewers look for in .cocci? Do we have a style? - When do we introduce .pending.cocci vs .cocci? - What do we do with .cocci after they've been applied? - Do we care about new patches slowing down coccicheck? Relevant threads - How to learn cocci: https://lore.kernel.org/git/230326.86edpcw0yh.gmgdl@e= vledraar.gmail.com/=20 - https://lore.kernel.org/git/230328.86a5zxw31u.gmgdl@evledraar.gmail.com/ - https://lore.kernel.org/git/230326.86ileow1fu.gmgdl@evledraar.gmail.com/ [1] https://lore.kernel.org/git/cover-v2-00.17-00000000000-20230328T110946Z= -avarab@gmail.com/