From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751203Ab3KRCe5 (ORCPT ); Sun, 17 Nov 2013 21:34:57 -0500 Received: from zeniv.linux.org.uk ([195.92.253.2]:32901 "EHLO ZenIV.linux.org.uk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750877Ab3KRCet (ORCPT ); Sun, 17 Nov 2013 21:34:49 -0500 Date: Mon, 18 Nov 2013 02:34:43 +0000 From: Al Viro To: Joe Perches Cc: Greg Price , Christopher Li , Erico Nunes , linux-sparse@vger.kernel.org, dwmw2 , linux-mtd , linux-kernel Subject: Re: [PATCH] Clarify error on directive in macro arguments (Re: [PATCH] jffs2: fix sparse errors: directive in argument list) Message-ID: <20131118023443.GN13318@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> References: <20131118020746.GX16018@ringworld.MIT.EDU> <1384740932.5814.4.camel@joe-AO722> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1384740932.5814.4.camel@joe-AO722> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Sun, Nov 17, 2013 at 06:15:32PM -0800, Joe Perches wrote: > > > 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. In which case? With printk() it's perfectly fine and sparse will not complain at all. With pr_info(), OTOH, we have #define pr_info(fmt, ...) \ printk(KERN_INFO pr_fmt(fmt), ##__VA_ARGS__) and when you start playing that kind of games with it, you get warnings.