[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <200801210917.30977.rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2008 09:17:30 +1100
From: Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>
To: Tejun Heo <htejun@...il.com>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Jeff Garzik <jeff@...zik.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/6] RFC: Typesafe callbacks
On Monday 21 January 2008 00:00:52 Tejun Heo wrote:
> What should be do are
>
> * Check that the threadfn's argument fits into void *.
For everything but timer, you'll get a warning if the data isn't assignable to
a void *, so you get a warning if you use a non-pointer already.
But it would be cool to allow functions which take an unsigned long. To do
this, I think that would need to be a special case for the data arg (which
we'd really want to wrap in a macro), like:
/* If fn expects an unsigned long, cast the data. If not, we'll
* get a warning if data is not void * compatible. */
__builtin_choose_expr(__builtin_compatible_p(typeof(1?(threadfn):NULL),
int (*)(unsigned long)),
(void *)(unsigned long)(data), (data))
> * Trigger overflow in implicit constant conversion warning if the
> specified data is too large for the argument type.
Hmm, u64 on 32-bit platforms? I think that will fail the above test: the type
of the function ptr will be "int (*)(u64)" and so you'll end up passing data
(a u64) to a void * argument, which will elicit a warning...
I'll test this out and see what I can make...
Thanks!
Rusty.
--
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