I guess you apply the patch on the official sparse's tree. The patch is base on my development tree here: http://git.kernel.org/?p=devel/sparse/chrisl/sparse.git;a=summary is_type_void() is introduced at change 405cd6edfe2e88c808f0a45f0c2ef92a854dbe67, warn about explicit usage of sizeof(void). Chris On Mon, Feb 9, 2009 at 5:38 AM, Thomas Schmid <Thomas.Schmid@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > christ.li@xxxxxxxxx schrieb am 09.02.2009 08:37:50: > >> On Fri, Feb 6, 2009 at 4:51 AM, Thomas Schmid >> <Thomas.Schmid@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> > christ.li@xxxxxxxxx schrieb am 06.02.2009 05:15:37: >> > - if (newtype->ctype.base_type != &fp_type) { >> > + if (is_int_type(newtype)) { >> >> I change your patch a little bit. The old logic of testing against float >> type is better. The type can be a pointer for example. Then using >> the long long value is more correct. >> >> See the patch attached. >> >> If there is not objections. I am going to apply this one. > > Thank you for correcting, your changes work fine for me. > > There's only a little problem with the patch, > patch breaks off in evaluate.c, cause there's no function "is_void_type" > within... > > Greetings > Thomas Schmid > -- 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
