On Mon, 30 Mar 2020, Markus Elfring wrote: > >> How will corresponding software development resources evolve? > > > > I don't think I understand the question, or, actually, are you asking > > me or the coccinelle developers ? > > I hope that more development challenges will be picked up. > > The code from a mentioned source file can be reduced to the following > test file. > https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/arch/x86/kvm/mmu/paging_tmpl.h?id=7111951b8d4973bda27ff663f2cf18b663d15b48#n122 > > // deleted part > static inline int FNAME(is_present_gpte)(unsigned long pte) > { > #if PTTYPE != PTTYPE_EPT > return pte & PT_PRESENT_MASK; > #else > return pte & 7; > #endif > } > // deleted part > > > Application of the software “Coccinelle 1.0.8-00029-ga549b9f0” (OCaml 4.10.0) > > elfring@Sonne:~/Projekte/Coccinelle/Probe> spatch --parse-c paging_tmpl-excerpt1.h > … > (ONCE) CPP-MACRO: found known macro = FNAME > … > parse error > = File "paging_tmpl-excerpt1.h", line 2, column 41, charpos = 57 > around = 'unsigned', > … > BAD:!!!!! static inline int FNAME(is_present_gpte)(unsigned long pte) > … > NB total files = 1; perfect = 0; pbs = 1; timeout = 0; =========> 0% > nb good = 1, nb passed = 1 =========> 10.00% passed > nb good = 1, nb bad = 8 =========> 20.00% good or passed > > > How would you like to improve the affected software areas? This can be addressed by adding a macro definition to standard.h. But once the change is done, I don't see any reason to bother with this. julia
