On 01/31/2010 04:08 AM, malc wrote:
On Wed, 27 Jan 2010, Anthony Liguori wrote:
On 01/27/2010 05:56 AM, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
On 01/27/2010 03:10 AM, Anthony Liguori wrote:
What did clang complain about? It's not obvious to me.
It doesn't see that audio_bug returns cond, and gives quite a f
On Wed, 27 Jan 2010, Anthony Liguori wrote:
> On 01/27/2010 05:56 AM, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> > On 01/27/2010 03:10 AM, Anthony Liguori wrote:
> > > What did clang complain about? It's not obvious to me.
> >
> > It doesn't see that audio_bug returns cond, and gives quite a few false
> > positive
On 01/27/2010 05:56 AM, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
On 01/27/2010 03:10 AM, Anthony Liguori wrote:
What did clang complain about? It's not obvious to me.
It doesn't see that audio_bug returns cond, and gives quite a few
false positive in its callers.
Ah, this is a clang issue. I'll have to defer
On 01/27/2010 03:10 AM, Anthony Liguori wrote:
What did clang complain about? It's not obvious to me.
It doesn't see that audio_bug returns cond, and gives quite a few false
positive in its callers.
Paolo
