From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: SF Markus Elfring Date: Tue, 02 Jan 2018 15:00:48 +0000 Subject: =?UTF-8?Q?Re:_Rename_the_SmPL_script_=e2=80=9ckzalloc-=e2=80=a6.coc?= =?UTF-8?B?Y2nigJ0/?= Message-Id: <6046ed93-71f0-7e2a-c02b-29783f2e4f4c@users.sourceforge.net> List-Id: References: <96aee198-15b2-dc96-a349-d8a70d06dc67@users.sourceforge.net> In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit To: Julia Lawall , cocci@systeme.lip6.fr Cc: Gilles Muller , Himanshu Jha , Masahiro Yamada , Michal Marek , Nicolas Palix , LKML , kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org >> * I am unsure which name will be better finally. >> Would we like to achieve another permalink here? > > Actually, according to th original name choice it is stillsimple, The involved contributors have got different views if the available script remains “simple” enough at the moment. > becaue it doesn't account for the possibility of many statement between > the alloc and the memset * How close should these function call be kept together? * Which additional statements would you tolerate between them? > and it doesn't account for different ways of expressing the size between > the two calls. Would you like to get any extensions there? > If you want to be more general than kzalloc, then perhaps > zalloc-simple.cocci would be ok. Will other suffixes be safer for a permanent file name so that confusion could be avoided around different expectations for “simplicity”? Regards, Markus