Re: [cocci] [PATCH v5 4/4] coccinelle: Add kmalloc_objs conversion script

[Markus Elfring <Markus.Elfring@web.de>]

>> See also:
>> https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst?h=v6.18-rc7#n94
> 
> "Describe your changes in imperative mood"
> 
> I guess I can try rewording this, …

I became curious once more how another improved change descrition can look like.


>>> +virtual patch
>>
>> Will additional operation modes become relevant after clarification of implementation details?
> 
> I am not interested in other modes; if people want to contribute them,
> they are welcome. :)

Will development interests eventually grow accordingly?


>> …
>>> +def alloc_array(name):
>>> +	func = "FAILED_RENAME"
>>> +	if name == "kmalloc_array":
>>> +		func = "kmalloc_objs"
>> …
>>
>> * I suggest to avoid duplicate variable assignments.
>>
>> * How do you think about to collaborate with the Python data structure “dictionary”?
> 
> I wanted the stderr warning when there was no match, but to return
> "FAILED_RENAME" in such a case.

Such a data processing result can be achieved also by a more appropriate algorithm,
can't it?


>                                 Using a dictionary was basically the
> same length as the elif stack. If you have an alternative, I'm happy to
> replace it with what you come up with.

Is there a need for further case distinctions?


>> …
>>> +type TYPE;
>>> +TYPE *P;
>>> +TYPE INST;
>>> +expression VAR;
>>> +expression GFP;
>> …
>>
>> Such repetition of SmPL key words can eventually be also avoided.
> 
> That is true, but I like having them separated -- I find it more
> readable that way.

Under which circumstances would you become used also to more succinct SmPL code?

Regards,
Markus