Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-117742-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 147.75.80.249 as permitted sender) client-ip=147.75.80.249;
Message-ID: <48034addaeb6c33ca8b3e636262b6c043ddc5359.camel@sipsolutions.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] rcu: mollify sparse with RCU guard
From: Johannes Berg <johannes@sipsolutions.net>
To: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@linaro.org>
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>
Date: Mon, 25 Mar 2024 19:43:18 +0100
In-Reply-To: <35355d02-3eef-4860-847b-b7bbf05f4a31@moroto.mountain>
References: <20240325101626.41584-2-johannes@sipsolutions.net>
	 <ZgGnuFJiTX5laS7c@boqun-archlinux>
	 <055111792727869a98c1fa693014e0b6f5d256ea.camel@sipsolutions.net>
	 <35355d02-3eef-4860-847b-b7bbf05f4a31@moroto.mountain>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
User-Agent: Evolution 3.50.4 (3.50.4-1.fc39) 
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0

On Mon, 2024-03-25 at 21:28 +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> 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.
> >=20
> > I can add a comment in there, I guess, something like
> >=20
> >  /* sparse doesn't actually "call" cleanup functions */
> >=20
> > perhaps. That reminds me I forgot to CC Dan ...
> >=20
>=20
> These are Sparse warnings, not Smatch warning... Smatch doesn't use any
> of the Sparse locking annotations.

Sure, of course. I just saw that you added cleanup stuff to sparse to
allow using it in smatch.

> Smatch handles cleanup basically correctly at this point.

Do you "run" / "emit" the cleanup function calls there? I briefly look
at doing that in sparse but it felt ... complicated, and then I saw the
condition in the cleanup function which I thought sparse could probably
not see through anyway.

johannes