162306a36Sopenharmony_ci// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0-only
262306a36Sopenharmony_ci///Find conditions where if and else branch are functionally
362306a36Sopenharmony_ci// identical.
462306a36Sopenharmony_ci//
562306a36Sopenharmony_ci// There can be false positives in cases where the positional
662306a36Sopenharmony_ci// information is used (as with lockdep) or where the identity
762306a36Sopenharmony_ci// is a placeholder for not yet handled cases.
862306a36Sopenharmony_ci// Unfortunately there also seems to be a tendency to use
962306a36Sopenharmony_ci// the last if else/else as a "default behavior" - which some
1062306a36Sopenharmony_ci// might consider a legitimate coding pattern. From discussion
1162306a36Sopenharmony_ci// on kernelnewbies though it seems that this is not really an
1262306a36Sopenharmony_ci// accepted pattern and if at all it would need to be commented
1362306a36Sopenharmony_ci//
1462306a36Sopenharmony_ci// In the Linux kernel it does not seem to actually report
1562306a36Sopenharmony_ci// false positives except for those that were documented as
1662306a36Sopenharmony_ci// being intentional.
1762306a36Sopenharmony_ci// the two known cases are:
1862306a36Sopenharmony_ci//   arch/sh/kernel/traps_64.c:read_opcode()
1962306a36Sopenharmony_ci//        } else if ((pc & 1) == 0) {
2062306a36Sopenharmony_ci//              /* SHcompact */
2162306a36Sopenharmony_ci//              /* TODO : provide handling for this.  We don't really support
2262306a36Sopenharmony_ci//                 user-mode SHcompact yet, and for a kernel fault, this would
2362306a36Sopenharmony_ci//                 have to come from a module built for SHcompact.  */
2462306a36Sopenharmony_ci//              return -EFAULT;
2562306a36Sopenharmony_ci//      } else {
2662306a36Sopenharmony_ci//              /* misaligned */
2762306a36Sopenharmony_ci//              return -EFAULT;
2862306a36Sopenharmony_ci//      }
2962306a36Sopenharmony_ci//   fs/kernfs/file.c:kernfs_fop_open()
3062306a36Sopenharmony_ci//       * Both paths of the branch look the same.  They're supposed to
3162306a36Sopenharmony_ci//       * look that way and give @of->mutex different static lockdep keys.
3262306a36Sopenharmony_ci//       */
3362306a36Sopenharmony_ci//      if (has_mmap)
3462306a36Sopenharmony_ci//              mutex_init(&of->mutex);
3562306a36Sopenharmony_ci//      else
3662306a36Sopenharmony_ci//              mutex_init(&of->mutex);
3762306a36Sopenharmony_ci//
3862306a36Sopenharmony_ci// All other cases look like bugs or at least lack of documentation
3962306a36Sopenharmony_ci//
4062306a36Sopenharmony_ci// Confidence: Moderate
4162306a36Sopenharmony_ci// Copyright: (C) 2016 Nicholas Mc Guire, OSADL.
4262306a36Sopenharmony_ci// Comments:
4362306a36Sopenharmony_ci// Options: --no-includes --include-headers
4462306a36Sopenharmony_ci
4562306a36Sopenharmony_civirtual org
4662306a36Sopenharmony_civirtual report
4762306a36Sopenharmony_ci
4862306a36Sopenharmony_ci@cond@
4962306a36Sopenharmony_cistatement S1;
5062306a36Sopenharmony_ciposition p;
5162306a36Sopenharmony_ci@@
5262306a36Sopenharmony_ci
5362306a36Sopenharmony_ci* if@p (...) S1 else S1
5462306a36Sopenharmony_ci
5562306a36Sopenharmony_ci@script:python depends on org@
5662306a36Sopenharmony_cip << cond.p;
5762306a36Sopenharmony_ci@@
5862306a36Sopenharmony_ci
5962306a36Sopenharmony_cicocci.print_main("WARNING: possible condition with no effect (if == else)",p)
6062306a36Sopenharmony_ci
6162306a36Sopenharmony_ci@script:python depends on report@
6262306a36Sopenharmony_cip << cond.p;
6362306a36Sopenharmony_ci@@
6462306a36Sopenharmony_ci
6562306a36Sopenharmony_cicoccilib.report.print_report(p[0],"WARNING: possible condition with no effect (if == else)")
66