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;
Reply-To: efremov@linux.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] scripts: coccinelle: check for !(un)?likely usage
To:     linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, cocci@systeme.lip6.fr
Cc:     Julia Lawall <Julia.Lawall@lip6.fr>,
        Gilles Muller <Gilles.Muller@lip6.fr>,
        Nicolas Palix <nicolas.palix@imag.fr>,
        Michal Marek <michal.lkml@markovi.net>,
        Markus Elfring <Markus.Elfring@web.de>,
        Joe Perches <joe@perches.com>,
        Rasmus Villemoes <linux@rasmusvillemoes.dk>
References: <20190825130536.14683-1-efremov@linux.com>
 <20190829171013.22956-1-efremov@linux.com>
From:   Denis Efremov <efremov@linux.com>
Message-ID: <d2f8cd31-f317-1b28-fb0a-bfb2cf689181@linux.com>
Date:   Thu, 29 Aug 2019 20:13:05 +0300
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/60.8.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <20190829171013.22956-1-efremov@linux.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On 8/29/19 8:10 PM, Denis Efremov wrote:
> This patch adds coccinelle script for detecting !likely and
> !unlikely usage. These notations are confusing. It's better
> to replace !likely(x) with unlikely(!x) and !unlikely(x) with
> likely(!x) for readability.

I'm not sure that this rule deserves the acceptance.
Just to want to be sure that "!unlikely(x)" and "!likely(x)"
are hard-readable is not only my perception and that they
become more clear in form "likely(!x)" and "unlikely(!x)" too.

Thanks,
Denis