From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org [172.17.192.35]) by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B59CF98F for ; Fri, 9 May 2014 19:41:16 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-pd0-f171.google.com (mail-pd0-f171.google.com [209.85.192.171]) by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 64CE52020F for ; Fri, 9 May 2014 19:41:16 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-pd0-f171.google.com with SMTP id r10so4070052pdi.2 for ; Fri, 09 May 2014 12:41:16 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 9 May 2014 12:41:12 -0700 From: Dmitry Torokhov To: Jiri Kosina Message-ID: <20140509194112.GA32068@core.coreip.homeip.net> References: <20140509170709.GA9747@redhat.com> <20140509171954.GC8289@cloud> <1399656674.4136.12.camel@jlt4.sipsolutions.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Cc: ksummit-discuss@lists.linuxfoundation.org Subject: Re: [Ksummit-discuss] coverity, static checking etc. List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Fri, May 09, 2014 at 09:08:49PM +0200, Jiri Kosina wrote: > On Fri, 9 May 2014, Johannes Berg wrote: > > > > I'd also like to nominate Christopher Li, for Sparse. > > > > Seconded, I'm also interested in general in whether people still think > > sparse is useful and we should give it attention, or should focus more > > on really getting everything into gcc - we have a number of sparse > > warnings in very low-level header files that get used everywhere, for > > example the one I just fixed in [1] or the one I tried to fix but that > > ended up being buggy ([2]), but there doesn't seem to be much attention > > to these during the patch submission etc. > > Just for the sake of datapoint -- running 'make C=1' before every git push > is part of my automated workflow. So yes, I am routinely using sparse. Same here - I try to run sparse every time I apply a new patch. Thanks. -- Dmitry