Re: coccinelle: api/devm_platform_ioremap_resource: remove useless script

[Masahiro Yamada]

Hi Julia

On Fri, Oct 25, 2019 at 5:38 PM Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@xxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>
>
> On Fri, 25 Oct 2019, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
>
> > On Fri, Oct 25, 2019 at 12:40:52AM +0900, Masahiro Yamada wrote:
> > > On Sun, Oct 20, 2019 at 7:13 AM Joe Perches <joe@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > > On Sat, 2019-10-19 at 21:43 +0100, Marc Zyngier wrote:
> >
> > > Alexandre Belloni used
> > > https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/9bbcce19c777583815c92ce3c2ff2586@xxxxxxxxxxx/
> > > as a reference, but this is not the output from coccicheck.
> > > The patch author just created a wrong patch by hand.
> >
> > Exactly. Removal of the script is a mistake. Like I said before is a healing
> > (incorrect by the way!) by symptoms.
> >
> > > The deleted semantic patch supports MODE=patch,
> > > which creates a correct patch, and is useful.
> >
> > Right!
>
> I ran it on the version of Linux that still has the script:
>
> fe7d2c23d748e4206f4bef9330d0dff9abed7411
>
> and managed to compile 341 of the generated files in the time I had
> available, and all compiled successfully.

Yeah, this semantic patch did the correct conversion
as its header part showed the confidence.

// Confidence: High



>  I can let it run again, and see
> how it goes for the rest.  Perhaps it would be acceptable if there was no
> report, and people would be forced to use the generated patch?

I do not think this is the right thing.
MODE=report is the default, and it is fine.

>
> If someone is writing lots of patches on this issue by hand, then perhaps
> they don't have make coccicheck to produce patches, and then would
> overlook this case completely.
>
> If it would be helpful, I could group the generated patches by maintainer
> or by subdirectory and send them out, if it would be easier to review them
> all at once.

Yes, please.

Subsystem maintainers trust you,
so I think it will make things move smoothly.

After converting most of files,
I want 283ea345934d277e30c841c577e0e2142b4bfcae reverted.


>
> Anyway, the rule is not in the kernel at the moment.  For it's future, I'm
> open to whatever people find best.  Personally, I prefer when same things
> are done in the same way - it makes the code easier to understand and
> makes it simpler to address other issues when they arise.


We always did the same things in the same way
except commit 283ea345934d277e30c841c577e0e2142b4bfcae




-- 
Best Regards
Masahiro Yamada