[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <877doii8n2.fsf@oldenburg2.str.redhat.com>
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 2021 14:31:45 +0100
From: Florian Weimer <fweimer@...hat.com>
To: Lukas Wunner <lukas@...ner.de>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...nel.org>,
Russell King - ARM Linux admin <linux@...linux.org.uk>,
linux-toolchains@...r.kernel.org,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
Theodore Ts'o <tytso@....edu>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Andreas Dilger <adilger.kernel@...ger.ca>,
Ext4 Developers List <linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux ARM <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: Aarch64 EXT4FS inode checksum failures - seems to be weak
memory ordering issues
* Lukas Wunner:
> On Fri, Jan 08, 2021 at 12:02:53PM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>> I appreciate Arnd pointing out "--std=gnu11", though. What are the
>> actual relevant language improvements?
>>
>> Variable declarations in for-loops is the only one I can think of. I
>> think that would clean up some code (and some macros), but might not
>> be compelling on its own.
>
> Anonymous structs/unions. I used to have a use case for that in
> struct efi_dev_path in include/linux/efi.h, but Ard Biesheuvel
> refactored it in a gnu89-compatible way for v5.7 with db8952e7094f.
Aren't those a GNU extension supported since GCC 3.0?
Thanks,
Florian
--
Red Hat GmbH, https://de.redhat.com/ , Registered seat: Grasbrunn,
Commercial register: Amtsgericht Muenchen, HRB 153243,
Managing Directors: Charles Cachera, Brian Klemm, Laurie Krebs, Michael O'Neill
Powered by blists - more mailing lists