From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Christopher Li Subject: Re: [PATCH] Add missing checks for Waddress-space Date: Fri, 24 Apr 2009 15:53:58 -0700 Message-ID: <70318cbf0904241553h58e18921q35c6001ad51cc662@mail.gmail.com> References: <20090423222519.48191d61@notas> 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 ([209.85.198.227]:14227 "EHLO rv-out-0506.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751010AbZDXWx6 (ORCPT ); Fri, 24 Apr 2009 18:53:58 -0400 Received: by rv-out-0506.google.com with SMTP id f9so1179719rvb.1 for ; Fri, 24 Apr 2009 15:53:58 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <20090423222519.48191d61@notas> Sender: linux-sparse-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-sparse@vger.kernel.org To: Martin Nagy Cc: linux-sparse@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Apr 23, 2009 at 1:25 PM, Martin Nagy wrote: > > Some of these are missing in evaluate.c. Maybe we should change the > option to not consider address space at all, if unset. It would be much > easier to make attribute_address_space() ignore it. I think disable it at attribute_address_space() might be better. Otherwise is_same_type() will still return false for address space difference. There are too many places to track down the address space comparison. Chris