From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: AS31976 209.132.180.0/23 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.1 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_NONE shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id C193F1F4B5 for ; Wed, 13 Nov 2019 02:11:45 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1731003AbfKMCLo (ORCPT ); Tue, 12 Nov 2019 21:11:44 -0500 Received: from pb-smtp1.pobox.com ([64.147.108.70]:54853 "EHLO pb-smtp1.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1730089AbfKMCLm (ORCPT ); Tue, 12 Nov 2019 21:11:42 -0500 Received: from pb-smtp1.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp1.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DAB622AB5D; Tue, 12 Nov 2019 21:11:39 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; s=sasl; bh=2BY6AvY39/8o madyOaTLL16U2jE=; b=G7b6JmYLLr6o9DMW627gHKqO8zhqL8pINulk6RoflLGw wFyElkhdbpGvnxMOD9d1SXiAclmGEUfB3FmOUyk/uAZR5SmnyMXyKoeqvSPX158g Va2DPcm5Ldr44L0h5byGrB7eFaepupCTv1q0E2OJ5YbiBaio/ZDN3cdZs0k7ZIs= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; q=dns; s=sasl; b=fiefGI /8b268Yg1KPII1OdNOZchS9QhCL6DgYEPnSkJ3bTi2L/d7lDz0qsKOLqS5bETVwz W0lYKp0w9X2u+a1QDEHij5UR+iy/66wrQfTEtirhtpKjKPgYWG586KVWxe5DJBEc JC1piMYkuFPkdcKxu2Kx8XJaz5PW8WBNmpA7U= Received: from pb-smtp1.nyi.icgroup.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp1.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D36DB2AB5C; Tue, 12 Nov 2019 21:11:39 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [34.76.80.147]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pb-smtp1.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 452CA2AB5B; Tue, 12 Nov 2019 21:11:39 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) From: Junio C Hamano To: =?utf-8?Q?Ren=C3=A9?= Scharfe Cc: Markus Elfring , git@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: coccinelle: adjustments for array.cocci? References: <50c77cdc-2b2d-16c8-b413-5eb6a2bae749@web.de> <5189f847-1af1-f050-6c72-576a977f6f12@web.de> Date: Wed, 13 Nov 2019 11:11:38 +0900 In-Reply-To: <5189f847-1af1-f050-6c72-576a977f6f12@web.de> (=?utf-8?Q?=22R?= =?utf-8?Q?en=C3=A9?= Scharfe"'s message of "Tue, 12 Nov 2019 19:37:23 +0100") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/26.3 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 X-Pobox-Relay-ID: ED6384E2-05BA-11EA-A067-C28CBED8090B-77302942!pb-smtp1.pobox.com Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Ren=C3=A9 Scharfe writes: > This reduces duplication in the semantic patch, which is nice. I think > I tried something like that at the time, but found that it failed to > produce some of the cases in 921d49be86 ("use COPY_ARRAY for copying > arrays", 2019-06-15) for some reason. Thanks for mentioning. I too recall that seemingly redundant entries were noticed during the review and at least back then removing the seemingly redundant ones caused failures in rewriting. That is why I am hesitant to touch any patch that says "simplify cocci rule" making it sound as if simplification is a good thing on its own. I have no problem with "we change the rule this way, which eliminates this false positive / negative, that is demonstrated in the added tests in t/ directory", though. Thanks.