On Mon, 12 Feb 2007, Christopher Li wrote: > > On Mon, Feb 12, 2007 at 10:28:19AM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote: > > > > (It is perfectly proper to have a typedef that is actually of a function > > type, so this looks like a sparse bug regardless, it looks just as if we > > don't turn a function type into a function pointer type when we see it as > > an argument in the declaration). > > Yes, we does, in examine_fn_arguments(). But not correctly inherent the attribute bits. Ahh. > I think this patch should fix it, I haven't try it myself on this bug yet. > It works on a different test case "function vs function ptr". > It has been posted to the list before. It is in my series as well. This looks good. Ack. Josh? The only thing that I reacted to is that maybe we should change the s->ctype.modifiers = 0; a few lines down into a s->ctype.modifiers &= ~MOD_PTRINHERIT; or something? Although the normal "create_pointer()" function just leaves it entirely alone. So I don't know what the correct thing to do is. I wonder why I did that in the first place (that code is _old_). Linus - 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
