On Sun, 26 Nov 2017, Joe Perches wrote: > On Sun, 2017-11-26 at 23:44 +0100, Julia Lawall wrote: > > My semantic patch and results are below. The semantic patch has some > > features that may or may not be desired: > > > > 1. It goes beyond printk, pr_xxx, dev_xxx, and netdev_xxx, by finding > > functions that are sometimes used with a format string ending with a > > newline. To reduce false positives, such a function is ignored if it is > > sometimes used with a string that ends in a space. This could lead to > > false positives where actually one of the calls has a \n that it should > > not have. > > > > 2. Coccinelle puts multipart strings on a single line. So the rule goes > > a little further and eliminates the multipartness. Basically "xxx " "yyy" > > becomes "xxx yyy" regardless of the length of the result. > > What about the semi-common string concatenation "foo" #var "bar" ? I don't think this is an issue. There is no " " pattern in this. It's true that if the pieces were on separate lines, Coccinelle will now put them on a single line. I'm not sure I want to bother with this. > > 3. Some prints appear not to end with a newline because they end with \n. > > where .\n was likely intended. Instead of creating \n.\n, the semantic > > patch just moves the .to the left of the . And if there was .\n. it just > > drops the final period. > > That may be a problem if the sentence is "something...\n" I think I was not clear. The sentence ends in ".\n.". > There seem to be many false positives in here too. Could you point to something specifically? I saw a lot of cases with prints followed by returns and gotos. I guess those are not likely false positives. julia -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kernel-janitors" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
