kernel/linux.git/scripts/coccinelle, branch v6.1.168

update Coccinelle URL

2022-08-07T19:30:36+00:00

Signed-off-by: Julia Lawall

coccinelle: free: add version constraint

2022-08-07T19:30:24+00:00

The various functions contain a NULL check starting in v5.15. Signed-off-by: Julia Lawall

scripts/coccinelle/free: add NULL test before dev_{put, hold} functions

2022-07-16T13:33:55+00:00

Since commit b37a46683739 ("netdevice: add the case if dev is NULL"), NULL check before dev_{put, hold} functions is not needed. Signed-off-by: Ziyang Xuan Signed-off-by: Julia Lawall

coccinelle: Remove script that checks replacing 0/1 with false/true in functions returning bool

2022-07-16T13:31:33+00:00

There is nothing wrong with current code that returns 0 or 1 for a function returning bool. It is perfectly acceptable by the C standard. To avoid churn of unwanted patches that are constantly sent to maintainers who do not care about this change, remove the script that flags it as an issue. This issue is not worth the burden on maintainers to accept useless patches. Link: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20220705073822.7276-1-jiapeng.chong@linux.alibaba.com/ Link: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20220429075201.68581-1-jiapeng.chong@linux.alibaba.com/ Link: https://lore.kernel.org/all/1649236467-29390-1-git-send-email-baihaowen@meizu.com/ Link: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20220317014740.3138-1-jiapeng.chong@linux.alibaba.com/ Link: https://lore.kernel.org/all/190b5c2f2f2fb9cc775fce8daed72bf893be48a4.1642065293.git.davidcomponentone@gmail.com/ Link: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20211214113845.439392-1-deng.changcheng@zte.com.cn/ Link: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20210824065735.60660-1-deng.changcheng@zte.com.cn/ Link: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20210824064305.60081-1-deng.changcheng@zte.com.cn/ Link: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20210824062359.59474-1-deng.changcheng@zte.com.cn/ Cc: Rasmus Villemoes Cc: Julia Lawall Cc: Michal Marek Cc: Peter Zijlstra Signed-off-by: Steven Rostedt (Google) Signed-off-by: Julia Lawall Acked-by: Rasmus Villemoes Acked-by: Paul Gortmaker

coccinelle: Extend address test from ifaddr semantic patch to test expressions

2022-07-03T21:45:05+00:00

The test of an expression's address does not necessarily represent the whole condition, it may only be a part of it. Also, an expression's address is likely to be non-zero in every test expression, not only in if statements. This change aims at detecting an address test in more complex conditions and not only in if statements. Signed-off-by: Jérémy Lefaure Signed-off-by: Julia Lawall

drop fen.cocci

2022-01-15T11:15:35+00:00

This semantic patch does not take into account the fact that of_node_put can be safely applied to NULL. Thus it gives only false positives. Drop it. Reported-by: Qing Wang Signed-off-by: Julia Lawall

scripts/coccinelle: drop bugon.cocci

2022-01-15T11:15:35+00:00

The BUG_ON script was never safe, in that it was not able to check whether the condition was side-effecting. At this point, BUG_ON should be well known, so it has probably outlived its usefuless. Signed-off-by: Julia Lawall Suggested-by: Matthew Wilcox

Merge tag 'coccinelle-5.16-rc1' of git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/jlawall/linux

2021-11-13T18:45:17+00:00

Pull coccinelle updates from Julia Lawall: - Update MAINTAINERS information (mailing list, web page, etc). - Add a semantic patch from Wen Yang to check for do_div calls that may cause truncation, motivated by commit b0ab99e7736a ("sched: Fix possible divide by zero in avg_atom() calculation") * tag 'coccinelle-5.16-rc1' of git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/jlawall/linux: coccinelle: update Coccinelle entry coccinelle: semantic patch to check for inappropriate do_div() calls

coccinelle: semantic patch to check for inappropriate do_div() calls

2021-09-11T20:57:39+00:00

do_div() does a 64-by-32 division. When the divisor is unsigned long, u64, or s64, do_div() truncates it to 32 bits, this means it can test non-zero and be truncated to zero for division. This semantic patch is inspired by Mateusz Guzik's patch: commit b0ab99e7736a ("sched: Fix possible divide by zero in avg_atom() calculation") Signed-off-by: Wen Yang Signed-off-by: Julia Lawall Cc: Gilles Muller Cc: Nicolas Palix Cc: Michal Marek Cc: Matthias Maennich Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman Cc: Masahiro Yamada Cc: Thomas Gleixner Cc: cocci@systeme.lip6.fr Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

scripts: coccinelle: allow list_entry_is_head() to use pos

2021-08-08T20:00:49+00:00

Currently use_after_iter.cocci generates false positives for code of the following form: ~~~ list_for_each_entry(d, &ddata->irq_list, node) { if (irq == d->irq) break; } if (list_entry_is_head(d, &ddata->irq_list, node)) return IRQ_NONE; ~~~ [This specific example comes from drivers/power/supply/cpcap-battery.c] Most list macros use list_entry_is_head() as loop exit condition meaning it is not unsafe to reuse pos (a.k.a. d) in the code above. Let's avoid reporting these cases. Signed-off-by: Daniel Thompson Signed-off-by: Julia Lawall