Re: [PATCH] Coccinelle: make DEBUG_FILE option more useful

[Julia Lawall]

On Thu, 26 Oct 2017, Masahiro Yamada wrote:

> Hi Julia,
>
>
> 2017-10-15 18:55 GMT+09:00 Julia Lawall <Julia.Lawall@xxxxxxx>:
> > Make coccicheck checked for the existence of DEBUG_FILE on each semantic
> > patch, and bailed if it already existed.  This meant that DEBUG_FILE was
> > useless for checking more than one semantic patch at a time.  Now the check
> > is moved to the start of make coccicheck, and the 2> is changed to a 2>> to
> > append to the file on each semantic patch.  Furthermore, the spatch command
> > that is run for each semantic patch is also added to the DEBUG_FILE, to
> > make clear what each stdout trace corresponds to.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Julia Lawall <Julia.Lawall@xxxxxxx>
> >
>
> I think this is a good improvement,
> and looks almost good to me.
>
> Just one nit.
>
>
> >
> >  }
> >
> > +if [ "$DEBUG_FILE" != "/dev/null" -a "$DEBUG_FILE" != "" ]; then
> > +       if [ -f $DEBUG_FILE ]; then
> > +               echo "Debug file $DEBUG_FILE exists, bailing"
> > +               exit
> > +       fi
> > +       touch $DEBUG_FILE
>
> I think this "touch" is redundant.
>
> If the DEBUG_FILE does not exist, 2>> will automatically create it.

Thanks very much for the feedback.  I will resubmit.

julia


>
>
>
>
> > +else
> > +       DEBUG_FILE="/dev/null"
> > +fi
> > +
> >  if [ "$COCCI" = "" ] ; then
> >      for f in `find $srctree/scripts/coccinelle/ -name '*.cocci' -type f | sort`; do
> >         coccinelle $f
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Best Regards
> Masahiro Yamada
>