Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752885AbaF2Kpv (ORCPT ); Sun, 29 Jun 2014 06:45:51 -0400 Received: from mout.web.de ([212.227.15.14]:64886 "EHLO mout.web.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752718AbaF2Kpu (ORCPT ); Sun, 29 Jun 2014 06:45:50 -0400 Message-ID: <53AFEE55.7080906@users.sourceforge.net> Date: Sun, 29 Jun 2014 12:45:41 +0200 From: SF Markus Elfring User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.6.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Julia Lawall CC: Coccinelle , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Fabian Frederick Subject: Re: [Cocci] [PATCH V3] scripts/coccinelle/free: Delete NULL test before freeing functions? References: <1403945247-21549-1-git-send-email-fabf@skynet.be> <53AE8613.8080600@users.sourceforge.net> <20140628120052.0b8670723928a967808dd544@skynet.be> <53AEA927.3010100@users.sourceforge.net> <20140628140157.98304218ad0919b1567cfee4@skynet.be> <53AF2CE6.5020300@users.sourceforge.net> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Provags-ID: V03:K0:LtTuMBEB3Z3/eVcj2JfTP1FMFKLcHIbhk60w527qNSeG1fPRkfu m+DlOU+tGD5Uz28103YUa8C1QN+dUxSyXMV2ruH6SHjPUlN9XhhYTyJdnLf+WisYGl25YlZ QILBq8kJMDiBj/q5AjhvpNNazBq1HFtV47YyRix8wPFk9N8Ii91Lzgzqzuob97JozdtpI/L GRacX97QlH1ooIllddlFQ== Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org >> https://systeme.lip6.fr/pipermail/cocci/2014-March/000676.html >> http://marc.info/?l=kernel-janitors&m=139405971927100&w=2 > Regular expressions do not allow taking advantage of the optimizations > provided by Coccinelle and are not easy for a reader to understand. I find that the application of regexes is appropriate here. Would you like to optimise any implementation details from my general approach? >> https://systeme.lip6.fr/pipermail/cocci/2014-March/000677.html >> http://marc.info/?l=kernel-janitors&m=139405983727148&w=2 > This is not safe due to the use of when any. You have no guarantee that > there is not a dereference of input in the matched region, or that the > value of input is still the argument value at the point of the test. Do you suggest to make the desired detection of input parameter validation a bit safer? Regards, Markus -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/