[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4B5E3F2C.2010702@zytor.com>
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 2010 17:02:36 -0800
From: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
To: Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>
CC: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
axboe@...nel.dk, rusty@...tcorp.com.au, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
ebiederm@...ssion.com, tytso@....edu, Trond.Myklebust@...app.com,
aelder@....com, hch@...radead.org, viro@...iv.linux.org.uk,
davem@...emloft.net, netdev@...r.kernel.org, x86@...nel.org,
mingo@...hat.com, dan.j.williams@...el.com,
borislav.petkov@....com, ying.huang@...el.com, lenb@...nel.org,
neilb@...e.de, cl@...ux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 7/8] percpu: add __percpu sparse annotations to hw_breakpoint
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?
>
A cast (using __typeof__) combined with an address space override?
-hpa
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists