(Ingo -- you seem to be the last person to touch all this stuff, and I can't untangle what you did, hence I'm sending this email to you)
On at least some of my configs on x86_64, when running sparse, I see bogus 'warning: context imbalance in '<func>' - wrong count at exit'. This seems to be because I have CONFIG_SMP=y, CONFIG_DEBUG_SPINLOCK=n and CONFIG_PREEMPT=n. Therefore, <linux/spinlock.h> does #define spin_lock(lock) _spin_lock(lock) which picks up void __lockfunc _spin_lock(spinlock_t *lock) __acquires(lock); from <linux/spinlock_api_smp.h>, but <linux/spinlock.h> also has: #if defined(CONFIG_DEBUG_SPINLOCK) || defined(CONFIG_PREEMPT) || \ !defined(CONFIG_SMP) //... #else # define spin_unlock(lock) __raw_spin_unlock(&(lock)->raw_lock) and <asm-x86_64/spinlock.h> has: static inline void __raw_spin_unlock(raw_spinlock_t *lock) { asm volatile("movl $1,%0" :"=m" (lock->slock) :: "memory"); } so sparse doesn't see any __releases() to match the __acquires. This all seems to go back to commit bda98685 ("x86: inline spin_unlock if !CONFIG_DEBUG_SPINLOCK and !CONFIG_PREEMPT") but I don't know what motivated that change. Anyway, Ingo or anyone else, what's the best way to fix this? Maybe the right way to fix this is just to define away __acquires/__releases unless CONFIG_DEBUG_SPINLOCK is set, but that seems suboptimal. Thanks, Roland - 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/