Thread (15 messages) 15 messages, 5 authors, 2018-09-10

Re: [PATCH RFC 3/5] coccinelle: add xxxsetbitsXX converting spatch

From: SF Markus Elfring <hidden>
Date: 2018-09-09 11:20:20
Also in: kernel-janitors, linux-amlogic, linux-arm-kernel, linux-ide, linuxppc-dev, lkml

How do you think about to add any more meta-data for this semantic patch script?

* SPDX identifier
* Copyright information
* Confidence level

https://bottest.wiki.kernel.org/coccicheck

+virtual context
Further variables will be needed if you would like to use corresponding
operation modes (besides “patch”).

+expression reg;
+expression set;
+expression clear;
I propose once more to avoid the repetition of (unnecessary) SmPL code.
This part could be written like the following instead.

+expression clear, set, reg;


If you would increase the usage of SmPL disjunctions, the specification
of duplicate SmPL code could be reduced considerably.

* Would you like to merge SmPL rules based on the distinction between
  the data types “u32” and “u64”?

* Did you identify any optional code in this transformation approach?

+@@
+expression base;
+expression offset;
+expression value;
+@@
+
+- mtu3_setbits(base, offset, value);
++ setbits32(base + offset, value);
+
+@@
+expression base;
+expression offset;
+expression mask;
+@@
+
+- mtu3_clrbits(base, offset, mask);
++ clrbits32(base + offset, mask);
Another update suggestion:

+@replacement@
+expression base, offset;
+@@
+(
+-mtu3_clrbits
++clrbits32
+|
+-mtu3_setbits
++setbits32
+)(base
+-     ,
++ +
+  offset, ...);


Would you like to try further software fine-tuning out?

Regards,
Markus
Keyboard shortcuts
hback out one level
jnext message in thread
kprevious message in thread
ldrill in
Escclose help / fold thread tree
?toggle this help