linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] MIPS: Transform old-style macros to newer "_

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <46573B23.1090700@zytor.com>
Date:	Fri, 25 May 2007 12:38:11 -0700
From:	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
To:	"Robert P. J. Day" <rpjday@...dspring.com>
CC:	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Ralf Baechle <ralf@...ux-mips.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] MIPS: Transform old-style macros to newer "__noreturn"
 standard.

Robert P. J. Day wrote:
>
> 
>   f() __attribute__((noreturn)) ;
> 
> you get:
> 
>   warning: data definition has no type or storage class
> 
> but gcc doesn't complain if you declare it thusly:
> 
>   __attribute__((noreturn)) f() ;
> 
> that strikes me as a flaw in gcc, no?
> 

Doesn't matter.  gcc accepts "void __attribute__((noreturn)) f();", and
thus, one can define:

#define __noreturn void __attribute__((noreturn))

... and declare functions as:

__noreturn f();

... which is the syntactially sane way of doing it.

	-hpa
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/