Received: by 2002:a25:824b:0:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id d11csp5972500ybn; Sun, 29 Sep 2019 09:33:50 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqw5jdd7mtOf/8vssvUDPU/AdBTfbrBXD3Cw2/RFQGVGp4D5LIezvmE7vpq9fQsxn8phFBn0 X-Received: by 2002:a17:906:fc2:: with SMTP id c2mr15697096ejk.261.1569774830245; Sun, 29 Sep 2019 09:33:50 -0700 (PDT) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1569774830; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=muDfNWFn9OZ5UWVNx2ZVkYz+ZFRukcp2i2KfGejvVCrx4eZkPEFZkaTseMXnW+XoPU P0n10EBAwjrQKUnhb8SAASm9zoMishAYWMiqqF40AmDIXH9E+C68SkQ7mGXQKTeixcgw aJvQBirRVDIW34ehfmqMToAFM1RN9/K4L1bDnvwPMTBX+QYbaRQ2tW/+LAzZtoXyz2pL 8Hcai5ouDZ/sg8idV/COjnEEnB0STYKz6cPwh2DoX0K/uf3z7xWb3LlZXca7v9iDtzAJ sMKpsXxD086gQXiewSCzsa52/AScHZ5Ye/X0RJE+H/bP/M9EuergAWK/6G08nrl9CXgw ZerQ== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:sender:mime-version:user-agent:references :message-id:in-reply-to:subject:cc:to:from:date; bh=eIfAkv8oHuU2IVl92gSjTavwLukWd96FwThYODdPTYE=; b=YemBlGd4SET+b+MNqdbEIowDpi0n/YnbyJUjbnqVChWrOAnrawKf4fRgFblt98AN4B b2xi0lgG4H1GDqk4rNnkXOKg9BRRgpfoQWE/DR9TMOcNuN80ydgz5gE9GNi0+vZn53Yr xkME9Mg2BbftKanFH7VA6g7CURqdsunRb4AT7pGkNhBprVi8ptjGzHMUSE43qSlKt8kS JBqfoSW5tKRmop2zTtQPieiqaqyd608zlgRy+xhK0p528I2gNWZcE6ePRpTlbWwWc/Pr urgyQPJqHwdNsZOJ5Gcxy36XbURAFEK/mL5DMPTPk3HFg/k9oNebhN8wJ0JIuOnvVodt Pghg== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [209.132.180.67]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id e18si5283575eds.68.2019.09.29.09.33.24; Sun, 29 Sep 2019 09:33:50 -0700 (PDT) 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; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1728755AbfI2QcO (ORCPT + 99 others); Sun, 29 Sep 2019 12:32:14 -0400 Received: from mail2-relais-roc.national.inria.fr ([192.134.164.83]:38918 "EHLO mail2-relais-roc.national.inria.fr" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726149AbfI2QcO (ORCPT ); Sun, 29 Sep 2019 12:32:14 -0400 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.64,563,1559512800"; d="scan'208";a="403854904" Received: from 81-65-53-202.rev.numericable.fr (HELO hadrien) ([81.65.53.202]) by mail2-relais-roc.national.inria.fr with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 29 Sep 2019 18:32:12 +0200 Date: Sun, 29 Sep 2019 18:32:12 +0200 (CEST) From: Julia Lawall X-X-Sender: jll@hadrien To: Yuehaibing cc: Gilles Muller , nicolas.palix@imag.fr, michal.lkml@markovi.net, maennich@google.com, gregkh@linuxfoundation.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, cocci@systeme.lip6.fr Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] scripts: Fix coccicheck failed In-Reply-To: <2c109d6b-45ad-b3ca-1951-bde4dac91d2a@huawei.com> Message-ID: References: <20190928094245.45696-1-yuehaibing@huawei.com> <2c109d6b-45ad-b3ca-1951-bde4dac91d2a@huawei.com> 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 List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Sun, 29 Sep 2019, Yuehaibing wrote: > On 2019/9/28 20:43, Julia Lawall wrote: > > > > > > On Sat, 28 Sep 2019, YueHaibing wrote: > > > >> Run make coccicheck, I got this: > >> > >> spatch -D patch --no-show-diff --very-quiet --cocci-file > >> ./scripts/coccinelle/misc/add_namespace.cocci --dir . > >> -I ./arch/x86/include -I ./arch/x86/include/generated > >> -I ./include -I ./arch/x86/include/uapi > >> -I ./arch/x86/include/generated/uapi -I ./include/uapi > >> -I ./include/generated/uapi --include ./include/linux/kconfig.h > >> --jobs 192 --chunksize 1 > >> > >> virtual rule patch not supported > >> coccicheck failed > >> > >> It seems add_namespace.cocci cannot be called in coccicheck. > > > > Could you explain the issue better? Does the current state cause make > > coccicheck to fail? Or is it just silently not being called? > > Yes, it cause make coccicheck failed like this: > > ... > ./drivers/xen/xenbus/xenbus_comms.c:290:2-8: preceding lock on line 243 > ./fs/fuse/dev.c:1227:2-8: preceding lock on line 1206 > ./fs/fuse/dev.c:1232:3-9: preceding lock on line 1206 > coccicheck failed > make[1]: *** [coccicheck] Error 255 > make: *** [sub-make] Error 2 Could you set the verbose options to see what the problem is? Maybe the problem would be solved by putting virtual report at the top of the rule. But it might still fail because nothing can happen without a value for the virtual metavariable ns. Should the coccinelle directory be only for things that work with make coccicheck, or for all Coccinelle scripts? julia