From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Codrin Alexandru Grajdeanu" Subject: Interrupt context Date: Sun, 23 Mar 2008 23:44:56 +0200 Message-ID: <3581ed890803231444i58cff10i408dc4d9bef7b184@mail.gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from fg-out-1718.google.com ([72.14.220.153]:33427 "EHLO fg-out-1718.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754025AbYCWVo6 (ORCPT ); Sun, 23 Mar 2008 17:44:58 -0400 Received: by fg-out-1718.google.com with SMTP id l27so2632083fgb.17 for ; Sun, 23 Mar 2008 14:44:56 -0700 (PDT) Content-Disposition: inline Sender: linux-sparse-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-sparse@vger.kernel.org To: linux-sparse@vger.kernel.org Cc: Octavian Purdila Hi all, I am a student from Politehnica University of Bucharest studying Computer Science. I would like to add some new kernel source checks based on sparse. The first idea would be to test if from interrupt context sleepy functions are called. To test this, sparse would be required to run twice. First to get all interrupt context functions, by verifying what arguments are passed to irq_handler_t() and what values are passed to the function pointers in struct timer_list, softirq_action and tasklet_struct. The second run would generate the call graph for this function and would verify if schedule() is called inside their call graph. What do you think about this? Thank you, Codrin Grajdenau