On Wed, 23 Nov 2016, Fengguang Wu wrote: > On Tue, Nov 22, 2016 at 11:44:34AM +0100, Jiri Kosina wrote: > > On Mon, 21 Nov 2016, Benjamin Tissoires wrote: > > > > > > Generated by: scripts/coccinelle/misc/noderef.cocci > > > > > > > > CC: Benjamin Tissoires <benjamin.tissoires@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > > Signed-off-by: Fengguang Wu <fengguang.wu@xxxxxxxxx> > > > > --- > > > > > > > > hid-lg.c | 6 ++++-- > > > > 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > > > > > > > --- a/drivers/hid/hid-lg.c > > > > +++ b/drivers/hid/hid-lg.c > > > > @@ -777,8 +777,10 @@ static int lg_probe(struct hid_device *h > > > > buf[1] = 0xB2; > > > > get_random_bytes(&buf[2], 2); > > > > > > > > - ret = hid_hw_raw_request(hdev, buf[0], buf, > > > sizeof(buf), > > > > - HID_FEATURE_REPORT, > > > HID_REQ_SET_REPORT); > > > > + ret = hid_hw_raw_request(hdev, buf[0], buf, > > > > + sizeof(*buf), > > > > > > This is wrong. I messed up and should have used "sizeof(cbuf)", but the > > > coccinelle script failed at detecting the correct solution (I guess it > > > couldn't). > > > > Fengguang, is there anything that could be done to improve this? > > CC Julie and Gilles. I'm not sure if the coccinelle script could be > made that smart. :) Thanks for forwarding. From looking at the code snippet, I have the impression that if it were possible, it would require an interprocedural analysis, and the cost would outweigh the benefit. Basically, I don't see any cbuf nearby. julia > > > Jiri, do you want me to send a v2 of the series or will you just amend > > > the patch while applying? > > > > I'll fix that up, no worries. Thanks, > > > > -- > > Jiri Kosina > > SUSE Labs > -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-input" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
