On Mon, Nov 17, 2014 at 2:22 AM, Josh Triplett <josh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Wait, is the above being parsed as applying the pure attribute to the
> return value rather than to the function? Or is that not the issue
> here?
That seems to be the case here, e.g. "__pure int pure1(long x);"
Currently sparse parse it as:
<node pure1>
<function>
<base type int> [pure]
Ideally it should be:
<node pure1>
<function> [pure]
<base type int>
There is reason sparse does that. Sparse parse "__pure int" as a base
type to hold the __pure. The parse don't know if that is a function or
a function
pointer yet.
I haven't look at move the [pure] to function node. That is likely
a much bigger change.
Chris
--
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
