Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
Date:   Mon, 20 May 2019 11:51:23 +0200 (CEST)
From:   Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@lip6.fr>
To:     Pavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz>
cc:     wen.yang99@zte.com.cn, Markus.Elfring@web.de,
        cocci@systeme.lip6.fr, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        Gilles Muller <Gilles.Muller@lip6.fr>,
        yamada.masahiro@socionext.com, michal.lkml@markovi.net,
        nicolas.palix@imag.fr
Subject: Re: Coccinelle: semantic patch for missing of_node_put
In-Reply-To: <20190520093303.GA9320@atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz>
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.21.1905201150440.2543@hadrien>
References: <201905171432571474636@zte.com.cn> <alpine.DEB.2.20.1905170912590.4014@hadrien> <20190520093303.GA9320@atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz>
User-Agent: Alpine 2.21 (DEB 202 2017-01-01)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk


On Mon, 20 May 2019, Pavel Machek wrote:

> Hi!
>
> > A semantic patch has no access to comments.  The only thing I can see to
> > do is to use python to interact with some external tools.  For example,
> > you could write some code to collect the comments in a file and the lines
> > on which they occur, and then get the comment that most closely precedes
> > the start of the function.
>
> How dangerous is missing of_node_put? AFAICT it will only result into
> very small, one-time memory leak, right?
>
> Could we make sure these patches are _not_ going to stable? Leaking
> few bytes once per boot is not really a serious bug.

Agreed.  Just tell Sasha.

julia

> 									Pavel
>
> --
> (english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
> (cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html
>