diff options
Diffstat (limited to 'contrib')
| -rw-r--r-- | contrib/coccinelle/README | 41 | ||||
| -rw-r--r-- | contrib/completion/git-completion.bash | 16 |
2 files changed, 47 insertions, 10 deletions
diff --git a/contrib/coccinelle/README b/contrib/coccinelle/README index 9c2f8879c2..f0e80bd7f0 100644 --- a/contrib/coccinelle/README +++ b/contrib/coccinelle/README @@ -1,2 +1,43 @@ This directory provides examples of Coccinelle (http://coccinelle.lip6.fr/) semantic patches that might be useful to developers. + +There are two types of semantic patches: + + * Using the semantic transformation to check for bad patterns in the code; + The target 'make coccicheck' is designed to check for these patterns and + it is expected that any resulting patch indicates a regression. + The patches resulting from 'make coccicheck' are small and infrequent, + so once they are found, they can be sent to the mailing list as per usual. + + Example for introducing new patterns: + 67947c34ae (convert "hashcmp() != 0" to "!hasheq()", 2018-08-28) + b84c783882 (fsck: s/++i > 1/i++/, 2018-10-24) + + Example of fixes using this approach: + 248f66ed8e (run-command: use strbuf_addstr() for adding a string to + a strbuf, 2018-03-25) + f919ffebed (Use MOVE_ARRAY, 2018-01-22) + + These types of semantic patches are usually part of testing, c.f. + 0860a7641b (travis-ci: fail if Coccinelle static analysis found something + to transform, 2018-07-23) + + * Using semantic transformations in large scale refactorings throughout + the code base. + + When applying the semantic patch into a real patch, sending it to the + mailing list in the usual way, such a patch would be expected to have a + lot of textual and semantic conflicts as such large scale refactorings + change function signatures that are used widely in the code base. + A textual conflict would arise if surrounding code near any call of such + function changes. A semantic conflict arises when other patch series in + flight introduce calls to such functions. + + So to aid these large scale refactorings, semantic patches can be used. + However we do not want to store them in the same place as the checks for + bad patterns, as then automated builds would fail. + That is why semantic patches 'contrib/coccinelle/*.pending.cocci' + are ignored for checks, and can be applied using 'make coccicheck-pending'. + + This allows to expose plans of pending large scale refactorings without + impacting the bad pattern checks. diff --git a/contrib/completion/git-completion.bash b/contrib/completion/git-completion.bash index e9647a103a..9e8ec95c3c 100644 --- a/contrib/completion/git-completion.bash +++ b/contrib/completion/git-completion.bash @@ -1521,13 +1521,9 @@ _git_fetch () __git_complete_remote_or_refspec } -__git_format_patch_options=" - --stdout --attach --no-attach --thread --thread= --no-thread - --numbered --start-number --numbered-files --keep-subject --signoff - --signature --no-signature --in-reply-to= --cc= --full-index --binary - --not --all --cover-letter --no-prefix --src-prefix= --dst-prefix= - --inline --suffix= --ignore-if-in-upstream --subject-prefix= - --output-directory --reroll-count --to= --quiet --notes +__git_format_patch_extra_options=" + --full-index --not --all --no-prefix --src-prefix= + --dst-prefix= --notes " _git_format_patch () @@ -1540,7 +1536,7 @@ _git_format_patch () return ;; --*) - __gitcomp "$__git_format_patch_options" + __gitcomp_builtin format-patch "$__git_format_patch_extra_options" return ;; esac @@ -2070,7 +2066,7 @@ _git_send_email () return ;; --*) - __gitcomp "--annotate --bcc --cc --cc-cmd --chain-reply-to + __gitcomp_builtin send-email "--annotate --bcc --cc --cc-cmd --chain-reply-to --compose --confirm= --dry-run --envelope-sender --from --identity --in-reply-to --no-chain-reply-to --no-signed-off-by-cc @@ -2079,7 +2075,7 @@ _git_send_email () --smtp-server-port --smtp-encryption= --smtp-user --subject --suppress-cc= --suppress-from --thread --to --validate --no-validate - $__git_format_patch_options" + $__git_format_patch_extra_options" return ;; esac |