> Do you have any idea how to improve it?
I see further software development possibilities of varying relevance
also for this script of the semantic patch language.
* The SmPL variables “lock_p”, “unlock_p” and “stop_p” could be declared
in a more succinct way just by listing them in the same statement.
* The source code search pattern can be too generic.
How do you think about to consider additional constraints
for safer data control flow analysis?
* Other operation modes might become helpful.
Regards,
Markus
Markus, thanks for your remarks!
On 09.04.2020 11:41, Markus Elfring wrote:
> * The source code search pattern can be too generic.
> How do you think about to consider additional constraints
> for safer data control flow analysis?
Could you please elaborate on that?
I used 'exists' keyword to find at least one branch that has
mutex_unlock+kthread_stop+mutex_lock chain.
> * Other operation modes might become helpful.
Thanks! I added 'context' mode, it's very good for this purpose.
Best regards,
Alexander
>> * The source code search pattern can be too generic.
>> How do you think about to consider additional constraints
>> for safer data control flow analysis?
>
> Could you please elaborate on that?
Julia Lawall chose to mention the design possibility “put when
!= mutex_lock(E) after the ...”.
https://systeme.lip6.fr/pipermail/cocci/2020-April/007107.html
https://lore.kernel.org/cocci/alpine.DEB.2.21.2004091248190.2403@hadrien/
> I used 'exists' keyword to find at least one branch that has
> mutex_unlock+kthread_stop+mutex_lock chain.
Are you informed about development challenges for data flow analysis
(or even escape analysis according to computer science)?
How many experiences can be reused from other known approaches?
Regards,
Markus