From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Mark Brown Subject: Re: Fix section mismatch in wm8995.c Date: Tue, 11 Jan 2011 17:28:40 +0000 Message-ID: <20110111172839.GE13429@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com> References: <20110111171013.GK6541@sirena.org.uk> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from opensource2.wolfsonmicro.com (opensource.wolfsonmicro.com [80.75.67.52]) by alsa0.perex.cz (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6E2D510386E for ; Tue, 11 Jan 2011 18:30:46 +0100 (CET) Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: alsa-devel-bounces@alsa-project.org Errors-To: alsa-devel-bounces@alsa-project.org To: Takashi Iwai Cc: Dimitris Papastamos , alsa-devel@alsa-project.org, Liam Girdwood List-Id: alsa-devel@alsa-project.org On Tue, Jan 11, 2011 at 06:18:49PM +0100, Takashi Iwai wrote: > Mark Brown wrote: > > Hrm, it'd be better to find some annotation for the pointer which lets > > us have the reference. We at a higher level only dereference the > > pointer from the probe path, preventing the discard isn't a great > > solution. > Nah, that's way too complex for the time being. I really prefer a > warning-less code for such a case. The array is ~25k so it's not a completely trivial amount of memory, unfortunately. > The whole __init stuff have lots of potential improvements. But, > improving it would cost pretty much. And we don't want yet another > new annotation... Very true. The other option is to refactor all the data structures to appease it which is painful.