Jeff King <peff@xxxxxxxx> writes: > On Wed, Aug 31, 2022 at 02:13:51PM +0200, Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason wrote: > >> Removing coccinelle rules because we're seeing slowness somewhere seems >> particularly short-sighted to me. >> >> Maybe we do run into intractable problems somewhere with it being slow, >> and we'd also like to cater to more "interactive" use. > > Agreed. I'm not wild about how long it takes to run either, but if it's > producing useful results, it seems worth it to pay the CPU (and I think > unused.cocci did find some useful results already). There's a point at > which the CPU use becomes intractable, but I don't think we're there > yet. I am not, either, as it does not look like it is producing all that useful results these days, but of course, we are looking at the end result of previous clean-up triggered by these existing rules, and therefore be biased---we only see cost of running the rules these days without seeing anything new getting caught.
