> Well, sparse is clearly "right", for all it cares it might very well be > static, but it seems this is necessary for something in the kernel and > we clearly can't forward-declare it in a header file. Perhaps we can add > some annotation to say > "__attribute__((yes_I_know_but_really_dont_want_this_to_be_static))" to > suppress this warning? This is getting annoying to me as well :-) We could do something like typeof(foo); in the macro. Not sure if that would make sparse happy. Also this is really working around a problem upto gcc 4.8. that was fixed in gcc 4.9 (adding numerical postfixes to all symbols) If it's ok to let LTO only support 4.9+ the patches could be reverted. -Andi -- 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
