Re: gcc tickets for sparse attributes
From: Johannes Berg
Date: Fri Jan 17 2014 - 05:23:35 EST
> > IMHO the context extension doesn't work well enough in sparse to
> > document and implement as is. It would be much better if it actually was
> > able to differentiate between contexts, rather than treating each one
> > the same.
> That would certainly be nice, but that's something actually much more
> easily done in GCC than in Sparse, given the types of information GCC
> already has available to implement features like alias analysis.
> In any case, the spec I wrote up assumes a distinction between contexts,
> but allows for an initial implementation like Sparse's that ignores the
Ok cool. :)
> > This would avoid the problem that locking one lock and
> > unlocking another (in the kernel's __acquire/ __release mechanism) could
> > still result in a warning.
> That would actually *not* produce a warning, though it should. In
> general, I *think* an implementation like Sparse's that ignores the
> distinction between locks should produce false negatives but not false
Right, it doesn't report one now.
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/