On Tue, Feb 21, 2017 at 11:03:56AM +0000, Will Deacon wrote: > On Mon, Feb 20, 2017 at 10:33:45PM +0100, Luc Van Oostenryck wrote: > > It's easy enough to patch sparse to not issue a warning when the > > override concerns a range (which would be perfect for the situation here), > > Controlled or not by a new warning flag. But I'm far from convinced > > that all uses of such "ranged-initialization" is used for default values > > that may be later overridden. > > How about not warning only when the overridden range covers the entire > length of the array? The only broken case I can think of that slips > through the cracks then is if somebody typoed the range so that it > accidentally covered the whole array and therefore suppressed the override > warning. > > Will I like it. Patch is coming. Luc -- 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
