On Sun, Oct 20, 2019 at 7:13 AM Joe Perches <joe@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Sat, 2019-10-19 at 21:43 +0100, Marc Zyngier wrote: > > Providing Coccinelle scripts that scream about perfectly valid code is > > pointless, and the result is actively harmful. > > Doubtful. > > If the new code is smaller object code and correct > than the conversion is worthwhile. I agree. We use multi-platform defconfig. I always appreciate the code refactoring that reduces the object size. > fyi: > > There are already ~450 uses of this function and maybe > ~800 possible additional conversions. > > > If said script was providing a correct semantic patch instead of being > > an incentive for people to churn untested patches that span the whole > > tree, that'd be a different story. > > Right. > > Alexandre Belloni used https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/9bbcce19c777583815c92ce3c2ff2586@xxxxxxxxxxx/ as a reference, but this is not the output from coccicheck. The patch author just created a wrong patch by hand. The deleted semantic patch supports MODE=patch, which creates a correct patch, and is useful. -- Best Regards Masahiro Yamada
