From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Josh Triplett Subject: Re: Bogus sparse warning? Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2007 00:22:44 -0800 Message-ID: <45D17554.5010000@freedesktop.org> References: <780B1941-729E-47CB-9716-578AD8D25302@cam.ac.uk> <20070212191434.GA1041@chrisli.org> <20070213014657.GA2922@chrisli.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="------------enig5CAA32827314F38408E7E7A4" Return-path: Received: from mail6.sea5.speakeasy.net ([69.17.117.8]:58288 "EHLO mail6.sea5.speakeasy.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751181AbXBMIWs (ORCPT ); Tue, 13 Feb 2007 03:22:48 -0500 In-Reply-To: <20070213014657.GA2922@chrisli.org> Sender: linux-sparse-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-sparse@vger.kernel.org To: Christopher Li Cc: Anton Altaparmakov , Linus Torvalds , linux-sparse@vger.kernel.org This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 2440 and 3156) --------------enig5CAA32827314F38408E7E7A4 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Christopher Li wrote: > On Tue, Feb 13, 2007 at 12:15:56AM +0000, Anton Altaparmakov wrote: >> I applied this patch to the current spares git code and reran my test = and=20 >> now we have two warnings: >> >> CHECK fs/ntfs/file.c >> fs/ntfs/file.c:2241:5: warning: incorrect type in argument 8 (differen= t=20 >> signedness) >> fs/ntfs/file.c:2241:5: expected int [signed] ( [signed] [usertype] = >> get_block )( ... ) >> fs/ntfs/file.c:2241:5: got int [signed] ( static [toplevel] *=20 >> )( ... ) >> include/linux/fs.h:1791:14: warning: incorrect type in argument 8=20 >> (different signedness) >> include/linux/fs.h:1791:14: expected int [signed] ( [signed] [usert= ype]=20 >> get_block )( ... ) >> include/linux/fs.h:1791:14: got int [signed] ( *get_block )( ... ) >> >> Best regards, >> >=20 > I see. In evaluate_call(). > evaluate_arguments() is called before target function arguments > are converted into pointers. >=20 > Can you please try this patch instead? Anton reported success with this revision of your patch, so I'd like to a= pply it to the sparse tree; could you please supply a Signed-off-by so I can d= o so? The same goes for several of the patches in your -cl2 tree, which I would= eagerly like to apply. Your patches look quite excellent, and greatly ad= vance the capabilities of Sparse in directions I've wanted to see it progress i= n. I'd prefer to pull your patches in as a block, to avoid inconveniencing y= ou by pulling them in piecemeal and forcing you to rebase the remaining patches= =2E - Josh Triplett --------------enig5CAA32827314F38408E7E7A4 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFF0XVVGJuZRtD+evsRAlTqAJwJWeER7xgGlafPz6jepKYKdgMyjwCdGQgC fI1mIyD6X8UWtY0b3CsDKJk= =xZ2Z -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --------------enig5CAA32827314F38408E7E7A4--