From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Richard Palethorpe Date: Fri, 04 Jun 2021 14:50:11 +0100 Subject: [LTP] [RFC PATCH v2 0/2] Libclang based analyzer In-Reply-To: References: <20210604111434.21422-1-rpalethorpe@suse.com> Message-ID: <8735txkacs.fsf@suse.de> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: ltp@lists.linux.it Hello Cyril, Cyril Hrubis writes: > Hi! >> Compared to the Coccinelle version it's very ugly. However I think >> this will allow us to get all the low hanging fruit without creating >> major problems for test developers. > > I had a look at the code and it does not seem to be that bad. It's > longer due to some boiler plate and more explicit but not necessarily > ugly. I agree, but "semantic patches" are a really elgant way of matching code compared to scanning the AST with some ad-hoc logic for matching. > >> I guess it could be run during CI if we either fix all the existing >> TEST() usages in the library or add an ignore list. I already have a >> Coccinelle script to help with the former. > > I will have a look at the patches generated by coccinelle, I supposed > that we want to merge them regardless. OK, I just sent in a patch for the CGroups part. -- Thank you, Richard.