From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Johannes Berg Subject: Re: gcc tickets for sparse attributes Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2014 09:33:16 +0100 Message-ID: <1389947596.4354.2.camel@jlt4.sipsolutions.net> References: <52D8BF2C.9090604@zytor.com> (sfid-20140117_062719_321749_D2A4BB7E) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from s3.sipsolutions.net ([144.76.43.152]:46120 "EHLO sipsolutions.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751064AbaAQIdW (ORCPT ); Fri, 17 Jan 2014 03:33:22 -0500 In-Reply-To: <52D8BF2C.9090604@zytor.com> (sfid-20140117_062719_321749_D2A4BB7E) Sender: linux-sparse-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-sparse@vger.kernel.org To: "H. Peter Anvin" Cc: Linux-Sparse , Linux Kernel Mailing List On Thu, 2014-01-16 at 21:27 -0800, H. Peter Anvin wrote: > However, I would also like support for the context extensions, but I'm > not knowledgeable enough to describe the semantics accurately. Would > anyone be willing to file a ticket describing how the context extension > works well enough that it could be implemented? 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. 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. johannes