From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Tejun Heo Subject: Re: [BUG report]sparse warnings on DEFINE_PER_CPU() symbols non-static Date: Wed, 4 Dec 2013 10:10:51 -0500 Message-ID: <20131204151051.GN3158@htj.dyndns.org> References: <5294175F.2080407@cn.fujitsu.com> <20131203222543.GQ8277@htj.dyndns.org> <20131203234320.GA15141@jtriplet-mobl1> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from mail-yh0-f42.google.com ([209.85.213.42]:44125 "EHLO mail-yh0-f42.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753488Ab3LDPKz (ORCPT ); Wed, 4 Dec 2013 10:10:55 -0500 Received: by mail-yh0-f42.google.com with SMTP id z6so11537230yhz.15 for ; Wed, 04 Dec 2013 07:10:55 -0800 (PST) Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20131203234320.GA15141@jtriplet-mobl1> Sender: linux-sparse-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-sparse@vger.kernel.org To: Josh Triplett Cc: Wanlong Gao , linux-sparse@vger.kernel.org, Wu Fengguang , kbuild-all@01.org, Rusty Russell , Christoph Lameter On Tue, Dec 03, 2013 at 03:43:20PM -0800, Josh Triplett wrote: > > Does the following patch make it go away? > > It should, but is there some reason why you couldn't make the definition > on the line immediately below that static? Weak symbols can't be static. That's the point of the whole thing. Thanks. -- tejun