On Sat, Feb 10, 2007 at 09:17:58PM -0800, Christopher Li wrote: > e.g. sparse has not way to know some function only get called with interrupt > disabled (or some lock already hold). So it assume interrupt is still > enable and generate wrong warnings. Another example is that some helper > function will wrap the locking function. Complain about the exit with locking > hold is wrong. > > I am hoping adding the cross function checking will reduce those false positive. > Any way, it need more information to reduce false positive. > > I am still working on the cross function checking. May be it will become > more useful one day. I have some stuff in that direction, but it take some resurrecting... - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-sparse" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
