From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Christopher Li Subject: Re: fun with declarations and definitions Date: Mon, 2 Feb 2009 12:17:06 -0800 Message-ID: <70318cbf0902021217r634f94a0y46fe572091a78634@mail.gmail.com> References: <20090202073018.GB28946@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from rv-out-0506.google.com ([209.85.198.239]:4023 "EHLO rv-out-0506.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753758AbZBBURG (ORCPT ); Mon, 2 Feb 2009 15:17:06 -0500 Received: by rv-out-0506.google.com with SMTP id k40so1637605rvb.1 for ; Mon, 02 Feb 2009 12:17:06 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <20090202073018.GB28946@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> Sender: linux-sparse-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-sparse@vger.kernel.org To: Al Viro Cc: linux-sparse@vger.kernel.org On Sun, Feb 1, 2009 at 11:30 PM, Al Viro wrote: > There are several interesting problems caused by the fact that > we create a separate symbol for each declaration of given function. Thanks for the patch. That is great. This is actually one of the two hard problem in sparse. I haven't able to solved them. (BTW, the other one was running out of modifier bits.) You patch seems base on Josh's tree. In my tree the context change has been back out, so the validation/context-named.c is gone. Other than that, the patch seems apply fine. I will take a closer look at it and get back to you. Chris