Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-117707-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 147.75.80.249 as permitted sender) client-ip=147.75.80.249;
Date: Mon, 25 Mar 2024 21:28:32 +0300
From: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@linaro.org>
To: Johannes Berg <johannes@sipsolutions.net>
Cc: Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@gmail.com>, rcu@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@kernel.org>,
	Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@kernel.org>,
	Josh Triplett <josh@joshtriplett.org>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] rcu: mollify sparse with RCU guard
Message-ID: <35355d02-3eef-4860-847b-b7bbf05f4a31@moroto.mountain>
References: <20240325101626.41584-2-johannes@sipsolutions.net>
 <ZgGnuFJiTX5laS7c@boqun-archlinux>
 <055111792727869a98c1fa693014e0b6f5d256ea.camel@sipsolutions.net>
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <055111792727869a98c1fa693014e0b6f5d256ea.camel@sipsolutions.net>

On Mon, Mar 25, 2024 at 05:41:22PM +0100, Johannes Berg wrote:
> Also __acquire()/__release() are just empty macros without __CHECKER__.
> So not sure the indirection really is warranted for this special case.
> 
> I can add a comment in there, I guess, something like
> 
>  /* sparse doesn't actually "call" cleanup functions */
> 
> perhaps. That reminds me I forgot to CC Dan ...
> 

These are Sparse warnings, not Smatch warning... Smatch doesn't use any
of the Sparse locking annotations.  Smatch handles cleanup basically
correctly at this point.

regards,
dan carpenter