From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752960AbXBKFuV (ORCPT ); Sun, 11 Feb 2007 00:50:21 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752958AbXBKFuU (ORCPT ); Sun, 11 Feb 2007 00:50:20 -0500 Received: from zeniv.linux.org.uk ([195.92.253.2]:42040 "EHLO ZenIV.linux.org.uk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752763AbXBKFuT (ORCPT ); Sun, 11 Feb 2007 00:50:19 -0500 Date: Sun, 11 Feb 2007 05:50:15 +0000 From: Al Viro To: Christopher Li Cc: Andi Kleen , linux-sparse@vger.kernel.org, linux kernel mail list , Josh Triplett Subject: Re: [ANNOUNCE] sparse-0.2-cl2 is now available Message-ID: <20070211055015.GR10050@ftp.linux.org.uk> References: <20070204085329.GA6520@chrisli.org> <20070210000055.GA19968@chrisli.org> <20070211051758.GA2113@chrisli.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20070211051758.GA2113@chrisli.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Sat, Feb 10, 2007 at 09:17:58PM -0800, Christopher Li wrote: > e.g. sparse has not way to know some function only get called with interrupt > disabled (or some lock already hold). So it assume interrupt is still > enable and generate wrong warnings. Another example is that some helper > function will wrap the locking function. Complain about the exit with locking > hold is wrong. > > I am hoping adding the cross function checking will reduce those false positive. > Any way, it need more information to reduce false positive. > > I am still working on the cross function checking. May be it will become > more useful one day. I have some stuff in that direction, but it take some resurrecting...