Re: [PATCH] coccinelle: assign signed result to unsigned variable

From: Julia Lawall
Date: Sat Sep 26 2015 - 11:55:47 EST

On Sat, 26 Sep 2015, SF Markus Elfring wrote:

> >> * Will a command-line parameter like "--include-headers-for-types"
> >> be needed here?
> >
> > This argument is never needed. It is only an optimization. It means that
> > he header files are only considered when collecting type information, but
> > not whn doing transformation. But this argument has no effect on the set
> > of types tha are available.
> I would consider the reuse of the parameter "--recursive-includes" then
> so that the most function signatures will be available.
> This has got some consequences on the execution speed and configuration
> for the source code analysis.
> Are there any risks to include too many functions?

Maybe if there are conflicting definitions of the function with different
return types. This is probably not a big deal in practice.


To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at