On Fri, 10 Jun 2022, Markus Elfring wrote:
>
> > The test of an expression's address does not necessarily represent the
> > whole condition, it may only be a part of it. Also, an expression's
> > address is likely to be non-zero in every test expression, not only in
> > if statements.
> >
> > This change aims at detecting an address test in more complex conditions
> > for every test expression.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Jérémy Lefaure <jeremy.lefaure@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> > v2 -> v3: Apply Julia's suggestion to have a more generic solution + adapt commit message and file
> > name to this new solution.
> > v1 -> v2: Moved disjunction on the condition itself instead of being on the
> > if statements.
> >
> > scripts/coccinelle/misc/{ifaddr.cocci => test_addr.cocci} | 4 +---
> > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 3 deletions(-)
> > rename scripts/coccinelle/misc/{ifaddr.cocci => test_addr.cocci} (94%)
> >
> > diff --git a/scripts/coccinelle/misc/ifaddr.cocci b/scripts/coccinelle/misc/test_addr.cocci
> > similarity index 94%
> > rename from scripts/coccinelle/misc/ifaddr.cocci
> > rename to scripts/coccinelle/misc/test_addr.cocci
> > index fc92e8fcbfcb..2d0ec86d1701 100644
> > --- a/scripts/coccinelle/misc/ifaddr.cocci
> > +++ b/scripts/coccinelle/misc/test_addr.cocci
> > @@ -14,12 +14,10 @@ virtual context
> >
> > @r@
> > expression x;
> > -statement S1,S2;
> > position p;
> > @@
> >
> > -*if@p (&x)
> > - S1 else S2
> > +*&x@p || ...
> >
> > @script:python depends on org@
> > p << r.p;
>
> A)
> I would like to point out once more that no questionable places were marked
> by the software “Coccinelle 1.1.1” (OCaml 4.14.0) in the following source code.
> https://lore.kernel.org/cocci/da86bc36-36af-7bd7-6bee-861e160ba6a4@xxxxxx/
> https://sympa.inria.fr/sympa/arc/cocci/2022-06/msg00017.html
>
>
> void check(void)
> {
> int s = 1;
> bool t = (&s);
> }
>
>
> Thus I propose to add another case distinction by the means of
> a SmPL disjunction.
>
>
> *\( &x || ... \| &x \)
>
>
> Will any more adjustments become helpful for the handling of optional code
> according to SmPL ellipses?
Did you actually try this? Because it will match every occurrence of &x.
I don't think that your example represents a real problem.
julia
>
>
>
> B)
> I imagine that generated diff output should be wrapped by a source block
> for the operation mode “org”.
> https://orgmode.org/quickstart.html#blocks
>
>
> Regards,
> Markus
>
