Hello all, I just wanted to get your opinion on if maintainers will find the patch bellow (and other like it) to be annoying or somewhat useful? In the following lwn article Linus is saying that if you intend to grab a lock in one function and release it in another, you need to inform sparse of this by adding annotations to the functions. http://lwn.net/Articles/109066/ The patch silences the following sparse warnings: arch/x86/kernel/apic/io_apic.c:1115:6: warning: context imbalance in 'lock_vector_lock' - wrong count at exit arch/x86/kernel/apic/io_apic.c:1123:6: warning: context imbalance in 'unlock_vector_lock' - unexpected unlock Best regards, Emil Goode --- arch/x86/kernel/apic/io_apic.c | 2 ++ 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+) diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/apic/io_apic.c b/arch/x86/kernel/apic/io_apic.c index c348c57..1ab46b1 100644 --- a/arch/x86/kernel/apic/io_apic.c +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/apic/io_apic.c @@ -1112,6 +1112,7 @@ int IO_APIC_get_PCI_irq_vector(int bus, int slot, int pin, } EXPORT_SYMBOL(IO_APIC_get_PCI_irq_vector); +__acquires(vector_lock) void lock_vector_lock(void) { /* Used to the online set of cpus does not change @@ -1120,6 +1121,7 @@ void lock_vector_lock(void) raw_spin_lock(&vector_lock); } +__releases(vector_lock) void unlock_vector_lock(void) { raw_spin_unlock(&vector_lock); -- 1.7.9.5 -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kernel-janitors" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
