On Wed, 15 Nov 2017, Masahiro Yamada wrote:
> Hi Julia,
>
>
> 2017-11-13 1:08 GMT+09:00 Julia Lawall <julia.law...@lip6.fr>:
> > An initial rule just matching a function call makes it possible to focus
> > on one all at a time, which improves performance in complex functions with
> > multiple locking calls. Using a constraint expression lock2 != pre.lock1;
> > makes it possible to eliminate the double matching of the lock, lock
> > sequence.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Julia Lawall <julia.law...@lip6.fr>
>
>
> If I apply this patch, locks/flags.cocci does not work for me.
>
>
> $ make coccicheck COCCI=scripts/coccinelle/locks/flags.cocci
> MODE=report DEBUG_FILE=log.txt
>
> Please check for false positives in the output before submitting a patch.
> When using "patch" mode, carefully review the patch before submitting it.
>
> 607 610
> coccicheck failed
> $ cat log.txt
> /usr/bin/spatch -D report --no-show-diff --very-quiet --cocci-file
> scripts/coccinelle/locks/flags.cocci --no-includes --include-headers
> --dir . -I ./arch/x86/include -I ./arch/x86/include/generated -I
> ./include -I ./arch/x86/include/uapi -I
> ./arch/x86/include/generated/uapi -I ./include/uapi -I
> ./include/generated/uapi --include ./include/linux/kconfig.h --jobs 8
> --chunksize 1
> Fatal error: exception Failure("meta: parse error: \n = File
> \"scripts/coccinelle/locks/flags.cocci\", line 29, column 20, charpos
> = 607\n around = 'pre', whole content = expression lock2 !=
> pre.lock1;\n")
>
>
>
> Could you check it?
What version of Coccinelle do you have?
But the way, Thierry Martinez should get in touch with you shortly about
the badzero problem.
julia
