[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <3CD096B0-2235-46AD-B0FC-83ED02778E41@mac.com>
Date: Sat, 6 Oct 2007 14:49:57 -0400
From: Kyle Moffett <mrmacman_g4@....com>
To: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
Cc: Ralf Baechle <ralf@...ux-mips.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Russell King <rmk@....linux.org.uk>,
Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@...radead.org>,
bryan.wu@...log.com, michael.frysinger@...log.com,
robin.getz@...log.com, Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org>,
LKML Kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Replace __attribute_pure__ with __pure
Trimmed the CC list a bit
On Oct 05, 2007, at 20:51:21, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> Ralf Baechle wrote:
>> To be consistent with the use of attributes in the rest of the
>> kernel replace all use of __attribute_pure__ with __pure and
>> delete the definition of __attribute_pure__.
>
> Concern: __attribute_pure__ is very similar to __attribute_const__,
> which is almost completely, but not totally unlike the keyword
> "const"...
Yes, there's also the fact that __pure is a reserved GCC keyword.
Essentially according to GCC docs all of the GCC-specific keywords
are equivalently defined as "keyword", "__keyword", and
"__keyword__", with only the latter two defined in strict-ANSI mode.
The following is valid according to GCC docs:
static int __attribute__((__pure)) my_strlen(const char *str);
With the proposed definition of __pure, that becomes a noticeably
invalid __attribute__((__attribute__((__pure__))))
Cheers,
Kyle Moffett
-
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