From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1760940AbYDCBvG (ORCPT ); Wed, 2 Apr 2008 21:51:06 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1757835AbYDCBuz (ORCPT ); Wed, 2 Apr 2008 21:50:55 -0400 Received: from smtp1.linux-foundation.org ([140.211.169.13]:58413 "EHLO smtp1.linux-foundation.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1757623AbYDCBuy (ORCPT ); Wed, 2 Apr 2008 21:50:54 -0400 Date: Wed, 2 Apr 2008 18:50:20 -0700 (PDT) From: Linus Torvalds To: Al Viro cc: Harvey Harrison , Andrew Morton , LKML , josh@freedesktop.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 7/7] asm-generic: suppress sparse warning in ioctl.h In-Reply-To: <20080403013420.GV9785@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> Message-ID: References: <1207182818.5740.26.camel@brick> <20080403013420.GV9785@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> User-Agent: Alpine 1.00 (LFD 882 2007-12-20) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, 3 Apr 2008, Al Viro wrote: > > Umm... How far do you want sparse to go? You _really_ don't want > bug-for-bug compatibility with gcc - it's far too weird (and that's > even before going into the effects of optimization flags). I would suggest just accepting link-time constants in constant expressions. But yeah, maybe limit even that just to unevaluated subexpressions. That said, for sparse, the right thing to do would be to use __builtin_warning() or something, but gcc doesn't have that kind of thing, so.. > BTW, what happened with sparse.git? Yeah, we do seem to have lost a maintainer. Linus