Re: [cocci] [PATCH v2 02/21] coccinelle: misc: Add secs_to_jiffies script
From: Markus Elfring <hidden>
Date: 2024-11-16 10:25:03
Also in:
ath11k, ceph-devel, cocci, dri-devel, intel-xe, kernel-janitors, linux-block, linux-bluetooth, linux-mm, linux-s390, linux-scsi, linux-sound, linux-staging, linux-wireless, linuxppc-dev, live-patching, lkml, netfilter-devel, xen-devel
Why is a change description missing here? …
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
+++ b/scripts/coccinelle/misc/secs_to_jiffies.cocci@@ -0,0 +1,21 @@
…
+/// Find usages of: +/// - msecs_to_jiffies(value*1000) +/// - msecs_to_jiffies(value*MSEC_PER_SEC)
I suggest to take another look at corresponding development documentation. https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/Documentation/dev-tools/coccinelle.rst?h=v6.12-rc7#n71 Will the attention grow for the proper usage of operation modes according to the tool “coccicheck”? …
+// Copyright: (C) 2024 Easwar Hariharan Microsoft
Should personal details and company names be better distinguished in such information?
+// +// Keywords: secs, seconds, jiffies
May a (blank) comment line be omitted here?
+@@ constant C; @@ + +- msecs_to_jiffies(C * 1000) ++ secs_to_jiffies(C) + +@@ constant C; @@ + +- msecs_to_jiffies(C * MSEC_PER_SEC) ++ secs_to_jiffies(C)
I suggest to take a SmPL code variant (like the following) better into account. @depends on patch@ constant C; @@ -msecs_to_jiffies +secs_to_jiffies (C - * \( 1000 \| MSEC_PER_SEC \) ) Can any expressions become relevant besides “constants”? Regards, Markus