On Fri, Jul 06, 2007 at 07:55:03PM -0700, Josh Triplett wrote: > 2. Does Sparse need to enforce any requirement that the functions > you assign to the function pointers actually acquire and release > some context? If so, you'd have to do some kind of unification. > However, I don't think Sparse needs to enforce that requirement. > Either your particular seq_operations need pairing for some > context reason, in which case you can specify a particular > context on them, or they don't need pairing for some reason, in > which case you don't need to specify a context on them. > Meanwhile, any actual callers of those functions using the > function pointers will get warnings as appropriate based on the > solution to problem 1. That won't work. You'll have ->show() calling the stuff that assumes that locks are already grabbed by ->start() => warnings galore. - 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
