On Thu, 24 Sep 2020, Thomas Gleixner wrote:

On Sat, Aug 22 2020 at 09:07, Julia Lawall wrote:

...

On Fri, 21 Aug 2020, Joe Perches wrote:

...

True enough for a general statement, though the coccinelle script Julia provided does not change a single instance of for loop expressions with commas.

As far as I can tell, no logic defect is introduced by the script at all.

The script has a rule to ensure that what is changed is part of a top level statement that has the form e1, e2;. I put that in to avoid transforming cases where the comma is the body of a macro, but it protects against for loop headers as well.

Right. I went through the lot and did not find something dodgy. Except for two hunks this still applies. Can someone please send a proper patch with changelog/SOB etc. for this?

And of course that script really wants to be part of the kernel cocci checks to catch further instances.

I will try to get to it soon. Thanks for checking all the cases. julia

Thanks,

tglx