Re: [Cocci] drivers/phy/tegra: Completion for exception handling in probe functions with SmPL?
> Will any search pattern variations become more interesting for corresponding > automatic software transformations? I hoped to achieve something together with the semantic patch language by the following transformation approach. @adjustment@ expression object; identifier exit; @@ object = kzalloc(...) ... if (...) -{ kfree(object); goto -exit +release_memory ; -} ... when any device_unregister(...); -exit +release_memory : +kfree(object); return ERR_PTR(...); Do you find such a change suggestion reasonable (in principle)? But I stumble on another unexpected test result. elfring@Sonne:~/Projekte/Linux/next-patched> spatch drivers/phy/tegra/xusb-tegra186.c ~/Projekte/Coccinelle/janitor/complete_exception_handling_in_probe_functions1.cocci init_defs_builtins: /usr/local/bin/../lib/coccinelle/standard.h HANDLING: drivers/phy/tegra/xusb-tegra186.c How would you like to clarify why diff hunks were not generated for functions like “tegra186_usb2_pad_probe” and “tegra186_usb3_pad_probe” in such an use case? https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/v5.4-rc2/source/drivers/phy/tegra/xusb-tegra186.c#L445 https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/drivers/phy/tegra/xusb-tegra186.c?id=bbf711682cd570697086e88388a2c718da918894#n445 Regards, Markus ___ Cocci mailing list Cocci@systeme.lip6.fr https://systeme.lip6.fr/mailman/listinfo/cocci
Re: [Cocci] drivers/phy/tegra: Completion for exception handling in probe functions with SmPL?
> But I stumble on another unexpected test result. I got more promising results by the following transformation approach. @adjustment exists@ expression object; identifier exit; @@ object = kzalloc(...) ... if (...) -{ kfree(object); goto -exit +release_memory ; -} ... when any device_unregister(...); -exit +release_memory : +kfree(object); return ERR_PTR(...); The scope property of such a SmPL rule occasionally needs also more software development attention. https://github.com/coccinelle/coccinelle/blob/ed1eb8e06f800739d3992158d36945c0c4c6f0c7/docs/manual/cocci_syntax.tex#L860 I observe that the pretty-printing for the generated source code will need further improvements (according to the Linux coding style). Example: elfring@Sonne:~/Projekte/Linux/next-patched> spatch drivers/phy/tegra/xusb-tegra186.c ~/Projekte/Coccinelle/janitor/complete_exception_handling_in_probe_functions6.cocci … @@ -461,10 +461,8 @@ tegra186_usb2_pad_probe(struct tegra_xus pad->soc = soc; err = tegra_xusb_pad_init(pad, padctl, np); - if (err < 0) { - kfree(usb2); - goto out; - } + if (err < 0) + goto release_memory; priv->usb2_trk_clk = devm_clk_get(&pad->dev, "trk"); if (IS_ERR(priv->usb2_trk_clk)) { @@ -483,7 +481,8 @@ tegra186_usb2_pad_probe(struct tegra_xus unregister: device_unregister(&pad->dev); -out: +release_memory : +kfree(usb2); return ERR_PTR(err); } … How reasonable do you find the presented update suggestion? Regards, Markus ___ Cocci mailing list Cocci@systeme.lip6.fr https://systeme.lip6.fr/mailman/listinfo/cocci