Re: [BUG] sparse warning EXPORT_SYMBOL()'d symbol non-static

[Josh Triplett <josh@joshtriplett.org>]

On Sun, Nov 24, 2013 at 12:28:51PM -0800, Andi Kleen wrote:
> > Well, sparse is clearly "right", for all it cares it might very well be
> > static, but it seems this is necessary for something in the kernel and
> > we clearly can't forward-declare it in a header file. Perhaps we can add
> > some annotation to say
> > "__attribute__((yes_I_know_but_really_dont_want_this_to_be_static))" to
> > suppress this warning? This is getting annoying to me as well :-)
> 
> We could do something like
> 
> typeof(foo); 
> 
> in the macro. Not sure if that would make sparse happy.

If you're just looking to mollify sparse, the easiest way is to
put a prototype of the symbol right before the symbol itself.

> Also this is really working around a problem upto gcc 4.8. that was fixed
> in gcc 4.9 (adding numerical postfixes to all symbols)  If it's ok to let LTO only support 4.9+ the patches could be reverted.

That seems like the best solution, assuming the later scripts can't be
fixed to cope with the numeric suffixes from 4.8.

- Josh Triplett