Re: Coccinelle: zalloc-simple: Delete function "kmem_cache_alloc" from SmPL rules

[SF Markus Elfring]

>> The function "kmem_cache_alloc" was specified despite of the technical
>> detail that this function does not get a parameter passed which would
>> correspond to such a size information.
>>
>> Thus remove it from the first two SmPL rules and omit the rule "r4".
> 
> Nack.

I find such a rejection surprising once more.


> It should be supported by the size determined in another way.

I am curious on how our different views could be clarified further
for this special software situation.

* Do we agree that a proper size determination is essential for every
  condition in the discussed SmPL rules together with forwarding
  this information?

* How can a name be ever relevant (within the published SmPL approach)
  for a function when it was designed in the way that it should generally
  work without a size parameter?

Regards,
Markus