On Thu, Sep 6, 2018 at 3:52 PM Luc Van Oostenryck
<luc.vanoostenryck@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> I suppose that hard-coding these names wouldn't be too bad.
> Otherwise, I only see something like:
I was thinking that we could do something like actually change sparse
to track a token instead of a number for the address space, and then
we'd just make the kernel eventually switch to
#define __user __attribute__((noderef, address_space(user)))
and the address space would just magically change from '1' to 'user'.
The sparse validation tests would then just use a token name, and you
coulkd just have a warning like
warning: cast removes 'user' address space of expression
and yeah, the kernel warnings would look odd for a while ("cast
removes '1' address space of expression"), but we'd know that they
eventually would become more legible as we start relying on a newer
version of sparse.
Maybe it's not a big deal, and maybe it's too painful to change the
asn from an integer to a token pointer. I didn't even look at that.
Linus
