On Thu, Oct 01, 2015 at 07:20:10AM +0200, Julia Lawall wrote:
> On Wed, 30 Sep 2015, Johan Hovold wrote:
>
> > This effectively reverts 932058a5d5f9 ("coccinelle: misc: semantic patch
> > to delete overly complex return code processing").
> >
> > There can be both symmetry and readability reasons for not wanting to do
> > the final function call as part of the return statement and to maintain
> > a clear separation of success and error paths.
> >
> > Since this is in no way mandated by the coding standard, let's just
> > remove this semantic patch to avoid having "clean up" patches being
> > posted over and over in response to these Coccinelle warnings.
>
> What do you mean by "posted"? Are you referring to 0-day build testing
> or individual usage of make coccicheck? Maybe it would make sense to
> remove the semantic patch from 0-day build testing but leave it in the
> kernel, perhaps removing the < 0 case because that one in practice doesn't
> seem to turn up much that is useful?
Individuals running coccicheck on in-kernel code and posting patches to
"fix warnings", where the end result is not necessarily an improvement.
But I don't think these warnings should be enabled for 0-day build
testing either as it is should be up to the author to decide what style
to prefer in each case.
> Perhaps it could also be improved to detect a previous != 0 case and then
> not return a warning. On some functions, this change can make some nice
> simplifications.
Yes, that would at least improve things.
I don't think warnings should be generated at all for the following
code:
{
int ret;
ret = init_a(...);
if (ret)
return ret;
ret = init_b(...);
if (ret)
return ret;
return 0;
}
as it is (at least to me) preferred over:
{
int ret;
ret = init_a(...);
if (ret)
return ret;
return init_b(...);
}
for symmetry and readability reasons (e.g. I don't have to look at
init_b to figure out what the functions returns). And with a long
parameter list to init_b with line breaks, this would look even worse.
But either way, it should be up to the author of the code to decide what
style to use.
Thanks,
Johan
_______________________________________________
Cocci mailing list
Cocci@systeme.lip6.fr
https://systeme.lip6.fr/mailman/listinfo/cocci
