Re: [Cocci] [PATCH v2 04/10] mmap locking API: use coccinelle to convert mmap_sem rwsem call sites

2020-03-27 Thread Michel Lespinasse
On Fri, Mar 27, 2020 at 12:22 AM Markus Elfring  wrote:
>
> > This change converts the existing mmap_sem rwsem calls to use the new
> > mmap locking API instead.
> >
> > The change is generated using coccinelle with the following rules:
>
> Would you like to apply only a single SmPL rule here?

I think this version of the patch is already a single rule, similar to
what you suggested ?

> > // spatch --sp-file mmap_lock_api.cocci --in-place --include-headers --dir .
>
> Command parameters like “--jobs 8 --chunksize 1” can be also helpful
> for a parallel execution of the desired software transformation.
>
> I suggest to consider another possibility for a bit of fine-tuning in the 
> shown
> SmPL script if you would eventually care for nicer run time characteristics
> for the application of such a SmPL disjunction.
> How do you think about to order the elements according to a probable
> function call frequency?

I'm not sure it matters that much, as long as it produces the correct
end result. The run takes about 25 seconds before any optimizations,
which I find very acceptable.

-- 
Michel "Walken" Lespinasse
A program is never fully debugged until the last user dies.
___
Cocci mailing list
Cocci@systeme.lip6.fr
https://systeme.lip6.fr/mailman/listinfo/cocci


Re: [Cocci] [PATCH v2 04/10] mmap locking API: use coccinelle to convert mmap_sem rwsem call sites

2020-03-27 Thread Markus Elfring
> This change converts the existing mmap_sem rwsem calls to use the new
> mmap locking API instead.
>
> The change is generated using coccinelle with the following rules:

Would you like to apply only a single SmPL rule here?


> // spatch --sp-file mmap_lock_api.cocci --in-place --include-headers --dir .

Command parameters like “--jobs 8 --chunksize 1” can be also helpful
for a parallel execution of the desired software transformation.

I suggest to consider another possibility for a bit of fine-tuning in the shown
SmPL script if you would eventually care for nicer run time characteristics
for the application of such a SmPL disjunction.
How do you think about to order the elements according to a probable
function call frequency?

Regards,
Markus
___
Cocci mailing list
Cocci@systeme.lip6.fr
https://systeme.lip6.fr/mailman/listinfo/cocci