Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.kernel > #1421098 > unrolled thread
| Started by | "Luis R. Rodriguez" <mcgrof@kernel.org> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2016-06-13 20:40 +0200 |
| Last post | 2016-06-14 07:10 +0200 |
| Articles | 5 — 3 participants |
Back to article view | Back to linux.kernel
This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by
below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.
Re: [Cocci] [PATCH 4/4] coccicheck: add indexing enhancement options "Luis R. Rodriguez" <mcgrof@kernel.org> - 2016-06-13 20:40 +0200
Re: [Cocci] [PATCH 4/4] coccicheck: add indexing enhancement options Wolfram Sang <wsa@the-dreams.de> - 2016-06-13 21:00 +0200
Re: [Cocci] [PATCH 4/4] coccicheck: add indexing enhancement options Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@lip6.fr> - 2016-06-13 21:50 +0200
Re: [Cocci] [PATCH 4/4] coccicheck: add indexing enhancement options "Luis R. Rodriguez" <mcgrof@kernel.org> - 2016-06-13 23:30 +0200
Re: [Cocci] [PATCH 4/4] coccicheck: add indexing enhancement options Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@lip6.fr> - 2016-06-14 07:10 +0200
| From | "Luis R. Rodriguez" <mcgrof@kernel.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-06-13 20:40 +0200 |
| Subject | Re: [Cocci] [PATCH 4/4] coccicheck: add indexing enhancement options |
| Message-ID | <rJEWf-1BQ-37@gated-at.bofh.it> |
On Sat, Jun 11, 2016 at 07:54:39AM +0200, Julia Lawall wrote: > > > On Sat, 11 Jun 2016, Wolfram Sang wrote: > > > > > > real 16m11.692s > > > user 127m50.388s > > > sys 0m2.168s > > > > That's better but not a magnitude, I wonder. > > I think that it is because the filtering that Coccinelle does already > works pretty well, and there are quite a lot of files (7514) that contain > kfree. Is there another scripts/coccinelle/ file I can use to test against to demo against glimpse/idutils/gitgrep best? Luis
[toc] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Wolfram Sang <wsa@the-dreams.de> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-06-13 21:00 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <rJFfF-1JY-29@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #1421098 |
[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw
> Is there another scripts/coccinelle/ file I can use to test against to demo > against glimpse/idutils/gitgrep best? I'd think this one may be a candidate: scripts/coccinelle/misc/irqf_oneshot.cocci Not too many, but quite some matches over the tree.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@lip6.fr> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-06-13 21:50 +0200 |
| Subject | Re: [Cocci] [PATCH 4/4] coccicheck: add indexing enhancement options |
| Message-ID | <rJG1X-2jr-23@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #1421153 |
On Mon, 13 Jun 2016, Wolfram Sang wrote: > > > Is there another scripts/coccinelle/ file I can use to test against to demo > > against glimpse/idutils/gitgrep best? > > I'd think this one may be a candidate: > > scripts/coccinelle/misc/irqf_oneshot.cocci > > Not too many, but quite some matches over the tree. Seems like a reasonable choice. julia
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Luis R. Rodriguez" <mcgrof@kernel.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-06-13 23:30 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <rJHAK-3pk-11@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #1421258 |
On Mon, Jun 13, 2016 at 09:48:30PM +0200, Julia Lawall wrote: > > > On Mon, 13 Jun 2016, Wolfram Sang wrote: > > > > > > Is there another scripts/coccinelle/ file I can use to test against to demo > > > against glimpse/idutils/gitgrep best? > > > > I'd think this one may be a candidate: > > > > scripts/coccinelle/misc/irqf_oneshot.cocci > > > > Not too many, but quite some matches over the tree. > > Seems like a reasonable choice. With this one on a 32-core system, I get: glimpse: real 0m6.549s user 0m49.136s sys 0m3.076s idutils: real 0m6.749s user 0m51.936s sys 0m3.876s gitgrep: real 0m6.805s user 0m51.572s sys 0m4.432s coccigrep: real 0m16.369s user 0m58.712s sys 0m5.064s I redirected stderr to stdout, and verified glimpse output has: glimpse request = request_threaded_irq Does this match expectations? Luis
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@lip6.fr> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-06-14 07:10 +0200 |
| Subject | Re: [Cocci] [PATCH 4/4] coccicheck: add indexing enhancement options |
| Message-ID | <rJOLU-e2-11@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #1421349 |
On Mon, 13 Jun 2016, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote: > On Mon, Jun 13, 2016 at 09:48:30PM +0200, Julia Lawall wrote: > > > > > > On Mon, 13 Jun 2016, Wolfram Sang wrote: > > > > > > > > > Is there another scripts/coccinelle/ file I can use to test against to demo > > > > against glimpse/idutils/gitgrep best? > > > > > > I'd think this one may be a candidate: > > > > > > scripts/coccinelle/misc/irqf_oneshot.cocci > > > > > > Not too many, but quite some matches over the tree. > > > > Seems like a reasonable choice. > > With this one on a 32-core system, I get: > > glimpse: > real 0m6.549s > user 0m49.136s > sys 0m3.076s > > idutils: > real 0m6.749s > user 0m51.936s > sys 0m3.876s > > gitgrep: > real 0m6.805s > user 0m51.572s > sys 0m4.432s > > coccigrep: > real 0m16.369s > user 0m58.712s > sys 0m5.064s > > I redirected stderr to stdout, and verified glimpse output has: > > glimpse request = request_threaded_irq > > Does this match expectations? Yes. I'm not sure that gitgrep would work as well when there are multiple keywords. It may descend to coccigrep. julia
[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]
Back to top | Article view | linux.kernel
csiph-web