lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2010]   [Jan]   [25]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH 7/8] percpu: add __percpu sparse annotations to hw_breakpoint
On Mon, Jan 25, 2010 at 05:06:37PM -0800, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> On 01/25/2010 04:19 PM, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> > On Tue, Jan 26, 2010 at 12:22:14AM +0900, Tejun Heo wrote:
> >> Add __percpu sparse annotations to hw_breakpoint.
> >>
> >> These annotations are to make sparse consider percpu variables to be
> >> in a different address space and warn if accessed without going
> >> through percpu accessors. This patch doesn't affect normal builds.
> >>
> >> per_cpu(nr_task_bp_pinned, cpu) is replaced with
> >> &per_cpu(nr_task_bp_pinned[0], cpu). This is the same to the compiler
> >> but allows per_cpu() macro to correctly drop __percpu designation for
> >> the returned pointer.
> >
> > Ouch... It's unpleasant to see such workaround that messes up the
> > code just to make sparse happy.
> >
> > I guess __percpu is an address_space attribute? Is there no
> > way to force the address space change directly from the
> > per_cpu() macro?
> >
>
> Hmm... thinking more about it, we should be able to just move the & and
> [0] into the per_cpu() macro, addressing the situation, or does that
> cause problems elsewhere?
>
> -hpa


That would work only with arrays. per_cpu() can access either pointers
or direct values. Well that can be worked around with fake casts, but
I would except the (typeof(x) __force) to work and then offer a more
elegant solution.



\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2010-01-26 02:15    [from the cache]
©2003-2014 Jasper Spaans. Advertise on this site