Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S266825AbUIMOWW (ORCPT ); Mon, 13 Sep 2004 10:22:22 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S266898AbUIMOWW (ORCPT ); Mon, 13 Sep 2004 10:22:22 -0400 Received: from witte.sonytel.be ([80.88.33.193]:10940 "EHLO witte.sonytel.be") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S266825AbUIMOWQ (ORCPT ); Mon, 13 Sep 2004 10:22:16 -0400 Date: Mon, 13 Sep 2004 16:22:10 +0200 (MEST) From: Geert Uytterhoeven To: Linus Torvalds cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List Subject: Re: Add sparse "__iomem" infrastructure to check PCI address usage In-Reply-To: Message-ID: References: <200409110726.i8B7QTGn009468@hera.kernel.org> <4144E93E.5030404@pobox.com> <414508F6.7020301@pobox.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 990 Lines: 32 While resuming adding __user annotations to the m68k-specific parts of the code, I stumbled on struct task_struct { ... unsigned long sas_ss_sp; ... } If I'm not mistaken, sas_ss_sp is always a pointer to user stack space. Shouldn't it be changed to `void __user *sas_ss_sp', or is an unsigned long/void * change in generic code a too controversial change for making sparse happy? And I guess I can find a few more of these... Gr{oetje,eeting}s, Geert -- Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@linux-m68k.org In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that. -- Linus Torvalds - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/