[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <b739fb9ad6e68bfe5d2a4b839abc8ea4@kernel.crashing.org>
Date: Sun, 24 Jun 2007 20:18:52 +0200
From: Segher Boessenkool <segher@...nel.crashing.org>
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
>> Hopefully correct handling of integer constant expressions. Please,
>> review.
>
> Heh... The first catches are lovely:
> struct fxsrAlignAssert {
> int _:!(offsetof(struct task_struct,
> thread.i387.fxsave) & 15);
> };
That's... wow?
> #define _IOC_TYPECHECK(t) \
> ((sizeof(t) == sizeof(t[1]) && \
> sizeof(t) < (1 << _IOC_SIZEBITS)) ? \
> sizeof(t) : __invalid_size_argument_for_IOC)
> poisoning _IOW() et.al., so those who do something like
>
> static const char *v4l1_ioctls[] = {
> [_IOC_NR(VIDIOCGCAP)] = "VIDIOCGCAP",
>
> run into trouble.
> The only reason that doesn't break gcc to hell and back is
> that gcc has unfixed bugs in that area.
If I understand correctly what bugs you are talking about,
most (all?) of those were solved in the dark ages already
(i.e., the 3.x series).
> It certainly is not a valid C
Why not? Nothing in the C standard says all your externs
have to be defined in some other translation unit you link
with AFAIK.
> or even a remotely sane one.
It's unusual at least :-)
Segher
-
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