> The changes were obtained by applying the following Coccinelle script. A bit of clarification happened for its implementation details. https://systeme.lip6.fr/pipermail/cocci/2018-October/005374.html I have taken also another look at the following SmPL code. > identifier fn =~ > "^(__pte_alloc|pte_alloc_one|pte_alloc|__pte_alloc_kernel|pte_alloc_one_kernel)$"; I suggest to adjust the regular expression for this constraint and in subsequent SmPL rules. "^(?:pte_alloc(?:_one(?:_kernel)?)?|__pte_alloc(?:_kernel)?)$"; > ( > - T3 fn(T1 E1, T2 E2); > + T3 fn(T1 E1); > | > - T3 fn(T1 E1, T2 E2, T4 E4); > + T3 fn(T1 E1, T2 E2); > ) I propose to take an other SmPL disjunction into account here. T3 fn(T1 E1, ( - T2 E2 | T2 E2, - T4 E4 ) ); > ( > - #define fn(a, b, c)@p e > + #define fn(a, b) e > | > - #define fn(a, b)@p e > + #define fn(a) e > ) How do you think about to omit the metavariable “position p” here? Regards, Markus
