From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752702Ab1FKRWU (ORCPT ); Sat, 11 Jun 2011 13:22:20 -0400 Received: from mta11.charter.net ([216.33.127.80]:45936 "EHLO mta11.charter.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751994Ab1FKRWQ (ORCPT ); Sat, 11 Jun 2011 13:22:16 -0400 X-Greylist: delayed 6543 seconds by postgrey-1.27 at vger.kernel.org; Sat, 11 Jun 2011 13:22:16 EDT X-Authority-Analysis: v=1.1 cv=1b2X7W/SifksZeClH/haT1SUt4udqxFGF00pZw2/jJk= c=1 sm=1 a=p9YancsnzTcA:10 a=bwGQv-0rnx0A:10 a=8nJEP1OIZ-IA:10 a=xzrYXqw+0zwiO4gHSXHcAg==:17 a=IifoD2hXYIodyOrEDE4A:9 a=wPNLvfGTeEIA:10 a=xzrYXqw+0zwiO4gHSXHcAg==:117 Message-ID: <4DF3A447.3050505@cuw.edu> Date: Sat, 11 Jun 2011 12:22:15 -0500 From: Greg Dietsche User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.9.1.16) Gecko/20110505 Icedove/3.0.11 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Julia Lawall CC: Nicolas Palix , rdunlap@xenotime.net, Gilles.Muller@lip6.fr, cocci@diku.dk, linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] coccicheck: add M= option to control which dir is processed References: <1307503774-30370-1-git-send-email-Gregory.Dietsche@cuw.edu> <1307503774-30370-2-git-send-email-Gregory.Dietsche@cuw.edu> <4DEFC6DA.9050809@cuw.edu> <4DF38AB8.4080004@cuw.edu> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 06/11/2011 10:40 AM, Julia Lawall wrote: > On Sat, 11 Jun 2011, Greg Dietsche wrote: > > >> On 06/08/2011 02:10 PM, Nicolas Palix wrote: >> >>> I am not familiar with out-of-tree development but I guess that in >>> that case we should >>> also add a "-I $KBUILD_EXTMOD/include" ? >>> >>> >>> >> I decided to skip doing this in V2 of the patch. I did a very quick test and >> cocci didn't seem to like two -I flags on one command line. >> > What was the problem and what version of coccinelle do you have? To my > recollection, the ability to have multiple -I options was added sometime > not so long ago. > > Hmm... my 'quick' test must have been bad. I just tested again with 0.2.3 (debian squeeze) and 1.0.0-rc3 and both seem to work just with multiple -I options. As I recall, originally, the script just exited with a code of 1 in my original test... so the updated line really should read: OPTIONS="-dir $KBUILD_EXTMOD -patch $srctree -I $srctree/include -I $KBUILD_EXTMOD/include" I'll send an updated patch in a day or two. I've got some other stuff to do today. Also, I noticed another bug that I'll need to fix too. The lines in my patch that read: echo 'M= is only supported for Coccinelle >= 0.2.3' exit 1 are flat out wrong... :( Greg > julia > > >>> The use of -I by Coccinelle depends on the other options (like >>> -include_headers or -all_includes). >>> Such options are retrieved from the comments in the cocci files. >>> So the need for -I depends on the semantic patch you consider. I think >>> it is thus better >>> to be "exhaustive" in that case. >>> >>> Julia, is there any performance problem in doing so ? >>> >>> >> Greg >>