2009/7/6 Johannes Berg <johannes@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>:> Whether or not the sparse warning>> warning: do-while statement is not a compound statement>> is justified or not in this case, it is annoying and> trivial to fix.>> Signed-off-by: Johannes Berg <johannes@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>> ---> include/linux/kmemcheck.h | 4 ++--> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)>> --- wireless-testing.orig/include/linux/kmemcheck.h 2009-07-06 11:41:16.000000000 +0200> +++ wireless-testing/include/linux/kmemcheck.h 2009-07-06 11:41:30.000000000 +0200> @@ -137,13 +137,13 @@ static inline void kmemcheck_mark_initia> int name##_end[0];>> #define kmemcheck_annotate_bitfield(ptr, name) \> - do if (ptr) { \> + do { if (ptr) { \> int _n = (long) &((ptr)->name##_end) \> - (long) &((ptr)->name##_begin); \> BUILD_BUG_ON(_n < 0); \> \> kmemcheck_mark_initialized(&((ptr)->name##_begin), _n); \> - } while (0)> + } } while (0)>> #define kmemcheck_annotate_variable(var) \> do { \>>>
I'll change the patch title to "kmemcheck: work around bogus sparsewarning" and fix the indentation, sounds ok?
Meanwhile, I Cced sparse mailing list in case somebody else knowsanything else about this warning (what it means, whether it'sjustified in this case, whether it should be fixed in sparse, etc.).
Thanks.
Vegard��.n��������+%������w��{.n�����{������{ay� ʇڙ���f���h������_�(�階�ݢj"��������G����?���&��
