Re: Are Section mismatches out of control?

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Fri, 2008-02-01 at 22:47 +0100, Jan Engelhardt wrote:
> On Feb 1 2008 03:21, Harvey Harrison wrote:
> >> 
> >> Question is: why do people keep adding new ones when they are so easy to
> >> detect and fix?
> >> 
> >> Asnwer: because neither they nor their patch integrators are doing adequate
> >> compilation testing.
> >
> >[...]
> >Unless they break the build, or if there currently are 0 and they make
> >it non-zero, people seem not to care....sad.  Probably the same for
> >sparse/checkpatch, "there's plenty already, I can't be bothered to look"
> 
> checkpatch does not parse C, it uses heuristical regexes.
> 
> That makes it very different from sparse or the section mismatch
> finder which do not output false positives.

Even by the exalted standards of LKML which sometimes seems to make a
virtue of misinformation, four wrong statements in twenty seven words is
pretty impressive ... I salute you!

James


-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-arch" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

[Index of Archives]     [Linux Kernel]     [Kernel Newbies]     [x86 Platform Driver]     [Netdev]     [Linux Wireless]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Linux Filesystems]     [Yosemite Discussion]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Samba]     [Device Mapper]

  Powered by Linux