[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <200706242007.10585.arnd@arndb.de>
Date: Sun, 24 Jun 2007 20:07:10 +0200
From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
To: Al Viro <viro@....linux.org.uk>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-sparse@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 16/16] fix handling of integer constant expressions
On Sunday 24 June 2007, Al Viro wrote:
> but the latter... Probably ought to be
> #define _IOC_TYPECHECK(t) \
> (sizeof(t) + BUILD_BUG_ON_ZERO(sizeof(t) == sizeof(t[1]) && \
> sizeof(t) < (1 << _IOC_SIZEBITS)))
>
> Objections? The only reason that doesn't break gcc to hell and back is
> that gcc has unfixed bugs in that area. It certainly is not a valid C
> or even a remotely sane one.
Yes, looks good. I originally came up with _IOC_TYPECHECK before we had
the generic BUILD_BUG_ON().
One minor issue though:
While BUILD_BUG_ON and a few other macros in linux/kernel.h are currently
exported to user space, I would think that they should really be hidden
in #ifdef __KERNEL__, which means that we also need something like
#ifdef __KERNEL__
#define _IOC_TYPECHECK(t) \
(sizeof(t) + BUILD_BUG_ON_ZERO(sizeof(t) == sizeof(t[1]) && \
sizeof(t) < (1 << _IOC_SIZEBITS)))
#else
#define _IOC_TYPECHECK(t) sizeof(t)
#endif
Arnd <><
-
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists