Re: [Cocci] [v3 05/10] mmap locking API: Checking the Coccinelle software
> The problem can be seen with the --debug option: > > FLOW: can't jump to VMALLOC_FAULT_TARGET: because we can't find this label > > It's not apparent with the --parse-c option because it's not a parsing > problem. Thanks for such information. Can the example be transformed even if extra source code was intentionally deleted for the easier clarification of the shown software test? Regards, Markus ___ Cocci mailing list Cocci@systeme.lip6.fr https://systeme.lip6.fr/mailman/listinfo/cocci
Re: [Cocci] [v3 05/10] mmap locking API: Checking the Coccinelle software
> // deleted part > retry: > down_read(>mmap_sem); > vma = find_vma(mm, address); > if (!vma) > goto bad_area; > // deleted part > } > // deleted part > > > Application of the software “Coccinelle 1.0.8-00029-ga549b9f0” (OCaml 4.10.0) > > elfring@Sonne:~/Projekte/Coccinelle/Probe> spatch --parse-c > do_page_fault-excerpt3.c > … > NB total files = 1; perfect = 1; pbs = 0; timeout = 0; => 100% > nb good = 15, nb passed = 1 => 6.25% passed > nb good = 15, nb bad = 0 => 100.00% good or passed > > > The discussed transformation approach can also be reduced for a test > to the following script for the semantic patch language. > > @replacement@ > expression x; > @@ > -down_read > +mmap_read_lock > ( > - & > x > - ->mmap_sem > ) > > > elfring@Sonne:~/Projekte/Coccinelle/Probe> spatch > use_mmap_locking_API_3.cocci do_page_fault-excerpt3.c > > > The desired diff is not generated so far. > How would you like to fix this situation? The problem can be seen with the --debug option: FLOW: can't jump to VMALLOC_FAULT_TARGET: because we can't find this label It's not apparent with the --parse-c option because it's not a parsing problem. julia___ Cocci mailing list Cocci@systeme.lip6.fr https://systeme.lip6.fr/mailman/listinfo/cocci
Re: [Cocci] [v3 05/10] mmap locking API: Checking the Coccinelle software
On Sat, 28 Mar 2020, Markus Elfring wrote:
> >> How will corresponding software development resources evolve?
> >
> > I don't think I understand the question, or, actually, are you asking
> > me or the coccinelle developers ?
>
> I hope that another communication approach can eventually increase
> the chances for a better common understanding of development challenges.
>
> The code from a mentioned source file can be reduced to the following
> test file.
> https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/arch/mips/mm/fault.c?id=69c5eea3128e775fd3c70ecf0098105d96dee330#n34
>
> // deleted part
> static void __kprobes __do_page_fault(struct pt_regs *regs, unsigned long
> write,
> unsigned long address)
> {
> struct vm_area_struct * vma = NULL;
> struct task_struct *tsk = current;
> struct mm_struct *mm = tsk->mm;
> // deleted part
> retry:
> down_read(>mmap_sem);
> vma = find_vma(mm, address);
> if (!vma)
> goto bad_area;
> // deleted part
> }
> // deleted part
>
>
> Application of the software “Coccinelle 1.0.8-00029-ga549b9f0” (OCaml 4.10.0)
>
> elfring@Sonne:~/Projekte/Coccinelle/Probe> spatch --parse-c
> do_page_fault-excerpt3.c
> …
> NB total files = 1; perfect = 1; pbs = 0; timeout = 0; => 100%
> nb good = 15, nb passed = 1 => 6.25% passed
> nb good = 15, nb bad = 0 => 100.00% good or passed
>
>
> The discussed transformation approach can also be reduced for a test
> to the following script for the semantic patch language.
>
> @replacement@
> expression x;
> @@
> -down_read
> +mmap_read_lock
> (
> - &
> x
> - ->mmap_sem
> )
>
>
> elfring@Sonne:~/Projekte/Coccinelle/Probe> spatch
> use_mmap_locking_API_3.cocci do_page_fault-excerpt3.c
>
>
> The desired diff is not generated so far.
> How would you like to fix this situation?
The problem is due to a preceding goto where the destination is expressed
as a macro name. Maybe there should be a warning in this case.
julia
>
> Regards,
> Markus
> ___
> Cocci mailing list
> Cocci@systeme.lip6.fr
> https://systeme.lip6.fr/mailman/listinfo/cocci
>___
Cocci mailing list
Cocci@systeme.lip6.fr
https://systeme.lip6.fr/mailman/listinfo/cocci
Re: [Cocci] [v3 05/10] mmap locking API: Checking the Coccinelle software
>> How would you like to fix this situation? > > Who exactly do you think "you" is? Every contributor with helpful software development resources for this issue. > I will look at it, Thanks for another promising feedback. > but it is not very polite to ask a user of Coccinelle such a question. We come along different views for the handling of such a bug report. Regards, Markus ___ Cocci mailing list Cocci@systeme.lip6.fr https://systeme.lip6.fr/mailman/listinfo/cocci
Re: [Cocci] [v3 05/10] mmap locking API: Checking the Coccinelle software
On Sat, 28 Mar 2020, Markus Elfring wrote:
> >> How will corresponding software development resources evolve?
> >
> > I don't think I understand the question, or, actually, are you asking
> > me or the coccinelle developers ?
>
> I hope that another communication approach can eventually increase
> the chances for a better common understanding of development challenges.
>
> The code from a mentioned source file can be reduced to the following
> test file.
> https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/arch/mips/mm/fault.c?id=69c5eea3128e775fd3c70ecf0098105d96dee330#n34
>
> // deleted part
> static void __kprobes __do_page_fault(struct pt_regs *regs, unsigned long
> write,
> unsigned long address)
> {
> struct vm_area_struct * vma = NULL;
> struct task_struct *tsk = current;
> struct mm_struct *mm = tsk->mm;
> // deleted part
> retry:
> down_read(>mmap_sem);
> vma = find_vma(mm, address);
> if (!vma)
> goto bad_area;
> // deleted part
> }
> // deleted part
>
>
> Application of the software “Coccinelle 1.0.8-00029-ga549b9f0” (OCaml 4.10.0)
>
> elfring@Sonne:~/Projekte/Coccinelle/Probe> spatch --parse-c
> do_page_fault-excerpt3.c
> …
> NB total files = 1; perfect = 1; pbs = 0; timeout = 0; => 100%
> nb good = 15, nb passed = 1 => 6.25% passed
> nb good = 15, nb bad = 0 => 100.00% good or passed
>
>
> The discussed transformation approach can also be reduced for a test
> to the following script for the semantic patch language.
>
> @replacement@
> expression x;
> @@
> -down_read
> +mmap_read_lock
> (
> - &
> x
> - ->mmap_sem
> )
>
>
> elfring@Sonne:~/Projekte/Coccinelle/Probe> spatch
> use_mmap_locking_API_3.cocci do_page_fault-excerpt3.c
>
>
> The desired diff is not generated so far.
> How would you like to fix this situation?
Who exactly do you think "you" is? I will look at it, but it is not very
polite to ask a user of Coccinelle such a question.
julia
>
> Regards,
> Markus
> ___
> Cocci mailing list
> Cocci@systeme.lip6.fr
> https://systeme.lip6.fr/mailman/listinfo/cocci
>___
Cocci mailing list
Cocci@systeme.lip6.fr
https://systeme.lip6.fr/mailman/listinfo/cocci
Re: [Cocci] [v3 05/10] mmap locking API: Checking the Coccinelle software
>> How will corresponding software development resources evolve?
>
> I don't think I understand the question, or, actually, are you asking
> me or the coccinelle developers ?
I hope that another communication approach can eventually increase
the chances for a better common understanding of development challenges.
The code from a mentioned source file can be reduced to the following
test file.
https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/arch/mips/mm/fault.c?id=69c5eea3128e775fd3c70ecf0098105d96dee330#n34
// deleted part
static void __kprobes __do_page_fault(struct pt_regs *regs, unsigned long write,
unsigned long address)
{
struct vm_area_struct * vma = NULL;
struct task_struct *tsk = current;
struct mm_struct *mm = tsk->mm;
// deleted part
retry:
down_read(>mmap_sem);
vma = find_vma(mm, address);
if (!vma)
goto bad_area;
// deleted part
}
// deleted part
Application of the software “Coccinelle 1.0.8-00029-ga549b9f0” (OCaml 4.10.0)
elfring@Sonne:~/Projekte/Coccinelle/Probe> spatch --parse-c
do_page_fault-excerpt3.c
…
NB total files = 1; perfect = 1; pbs = 0; timeout = 0; => 100%
nb good = 15, nb passed = 1 => 6.25% passed
nb good = 15, nb bad = 0 => 100.00% good or passed
The discussed transformation approach can also be reduced for a test
to the following script for the semantic patch language.
@replacement@
expression x;
@@
-down_read
+mmap_read_lock
(
- &
x
- ->mmap_sem
)
elfring@Sonne:~/Projekte/Coccinelle/Probe> spatch use_mmap_locking_API_3.cocci
do_page_fault-excerpt3.c
The desired diff is not generated so far.
How would you like to fix this situation?
Regards,
Markus
___
Cocci mailing list
Cocci@systeme.lip6.fr
https://systeme.lip6.fr/mailman/listinfo/cocci
