From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Al Viro Subject: Re: [patchset] rewrite of initializer handling Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2007 23:43:55 +0100 Message-ID: <20070618224355.GK21478@ftp.linux.org.uk> References: <20070618101929.GE21478@ftp.linux.org.uk> <4676CC9C.3050903@freedesktop.org> <20070618191653.GG21478@ftp.linux.org.uk> <4676FD25.9030504@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from zeniv.linux.org.uk ([195.92.253.2]:52474 "EHLO ZenIV.linux.org.uk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1762953AbXFRWn5 (ORCPT ); Mon, 18 Jun 2007 18:43:57 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4676FD25.9030504@redhat.com> Sender: linux-sparse-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-sparse@vger.kernel.org To: Michael Stefaniuc Cc: Josh Triplett , linux-sparse@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Jun 18, 2007 at 11:46:13PM +0200, Michael Stefaniuc wrote: > > Umm... I don't think that it's related. count_array_initializer() would > > work just fine for that one, since the straightforward list element counting > > would work as-is. > Right, it doesn't fixes this error. Actually the output of > make clean; CHECK='sparse -Wno-transparent-union -Wno-old-initializer > -Wno-non-pointer-null' make CC=cgcc > build.out 2>&1 > is identical bit by bit with or without Al's patch series. Eh... count_array_initializer() is not even touched in that series anyway. The question had been how to fix it; Josh asked if fixing it would take care of your report as well and I said "no". Patch that followed was unrelated to count_array_initializer() problems or problems fixed by patch series that went into the tree. > Works for Wine and removes most of the "error: cannot size expression" > errors. Any regressions? > The 7 remaining errors are preceded by "error: bad constant > expression" in the same line. Have to condense those into a test case too. Probably genuine VLAs...