On Fri, Feb 01, 2008 at 10:47:25PM +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. Unfortunately I most correct you. Section mismatch checks seldoms finds what I would call 'real' bugs that causes oops - but it happen. It is mostly fasle positives that needs workaround, but also a great deal of missing annotation resulting in additional memory saved. And then occasionally a bad reference in some error handling that seldom trigger but when it does it would oops. Sam - 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
