>>> I find the patch subject improvable.
>>> You would like to detect the remaining usage of redundant null pointer checks
>>> before selected function calls.
>>> Thus it would be nice if the corresponding description can become clearer
>>> another bit, wouldn't it?
>> Sorry, I did not get your mean.
>
> How do you think about a wording like the following?
>
> Commit subject:
> [PATCH] coccinelle: Add detection for redundant null pointer checks before dev_{put,hold} function calls
>
> Commit description:
> The information “Add the case if dev is NULL in dev_{put, hold},
> so the caller doesn't need to care whether dev is NULL or not.”
> was provided by the commit b37a466837393af72fe8bcb8f1436410f3f173f3
> ("netdevice: add the case if dev is NULL").
> Thus extend source code analyses and corresponding transformations
> by the means of the semantic patch language so that null pointer checks
> which became unnecessary at other places because of the mentioned input
> parameter validation.
Patch title looks like better. And I think the main destination of the description is
to tell others what you want to do. If it can, I think it's OK. After all, everyone's style
is different. But I will refer to your suggestions. Thank you!
>
>>> Did you order the case distinctions in the SmPL disjunction according to
>>> the call frequencies of the mentioned function names?
>> No, no any special, just list the related functions.
> Will this view influence the selection which SmPL code variant
> will be preferred finally?
>
>
> Do you get further software development ideas from a data processing approach
> which I published before?
> https://build.opensuse.org/package/show/home:elfring:semantic_patching:Deletion_of_checks_before_specific_function_calls/Deletion_of_checks_before_specific_function_calls_in_Linux_source_files
Sorry, I didn't learn about these. I learn about coccinelle recently by coccinelle scripts in Linux
kernel and coccinelle official website. Now I get more resources. Thank you!
I will give the v2 patch with your suggestions. Thank you!
> Regards,
> Markus
> .
