On Sun, 2013-11-17 at 21:07 -0500, Greg Price wrote: > [+linux-sparse and Chris] > > On Mon, Nov 18, 2013 at 01:33:49AM +0000, Al Viro wrote: > > On Sun, Nov 17, 2013 at 02:45:05PM -0800, Joe Perches wrote: > > > Yes. I think it's a defect in how sparse > > > treats string concatenation. > > > > > > That style [... with printk ...] is pretty common in the kernel sources. > > > > ... and it's perfectly fine, until somebody starts playing in nasal > > daemon country and do that in *macro* arguments. And a nasal daemon > > country it is - it's an undefined behaviour. See 6.10.3p11 in C99. > > And trying to define a semantics for that gets real ugly real fast. > > sparse matches gcc behaviour (I hope), but it warns about such abuses. > > It's a defect, all right - one being reported by sparse. > > Perhaps the following tweak to the error message would make this > subtlety clearer? Maybe, but this case isn't a macro. It's a function. Dunno if differentiating when it's a macro or a function is difficult though. -- 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
