Re: [PATCH 1/2] irq_flags_t: intro and core annotations

Hi,

On Oct 21 2007, Alexey Dobriyan wrote:
>
>One of type of bugs steadily being fought is the following one:
>
>	unsigned int flags;
>	spin_lock_irqsave(&lock, flags);
>
>where "flags" should be "unsigned long". Here is far from complete list 
>of commits fixing such bugs:
>

How about making spin_lock_irqsave actually take a pointer to flags? 
(Which would be the logical choice if it were a function and not a 
macro...) That would flag up all violations ("without cast to different 
pointer" or so) while usually not breaking compilation.

Of course, irq_flags_t is probably the best long-term solution if one 
wants to hide a struct. (Even then perhaps, use a pointer instead?)
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

---

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: [PATCH 1/2] irq_flags_t: intro and core annotations
    • From: Alexey Dobriyan <[email protected]>

• References:
  • [PATCH 1/2] irq_flags_t: intro and core annotations
    • From: Alexey Dobriyan <[email protected]>

• Prev by Date: Re: [PATCH] Permit silencing of __deprecated warnings.
• Next by Date: Re: [PATCH] [libata] fix 'if(' and similar areas that lack whitespace
• Previous by thread: Re: [PATCH 1/2] irq_flags_t: intro and core annotations
• Next by thread: Re: [PATCH 1/2] irq_flags_t: intro and core annotations
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread

[Index of Archives]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Photo]     [Stuff]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Video 4 Linux]     [Linux for the blind]     [Linux Resources]