[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <48BE80E7.76E4.0078.0@novell.com>
Date: Wed, 03 Sep 2008 11:19:51 +0100
From: "Jan Beulich" <jbeulich@...ell.com>
To: "Boaz Harrosh" <bharrosh@...asas.com>
Cc: "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
"Ingo Molnar" <mingo@...e.hu>,
"Alexey Dobriyan" <adobriyan@...il.com>,
"Ivo van Doorn" <IvDoorn@...il.com>,
"Andrew Morton" <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
"Linus Torvalds" <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
"Theodore Tso" <tytso@....edu>,
"Rusty Russell" <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>,
"John W. Linville" <linville@...driver.com>,
"linux-kernel" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/5 ver2] debug: BUILD_BUG_ON: error on non-const
expressions
>>> Boaz Harrosh <bharrosh@...asas.com> 03.09.08 10:57 >>>
>Jan Beulich wrote:
>>>>> Boaz Harrosh <bharrosh@...asas.com> 02.09.08 17:57 >>>
>>> -#define BUILD_BUG_ON_ZERO(e) (sizeof(char[1 - 2 * !!(e)]) - 1)
>>> +#define BUILD_BUG_ON_ZERO(e) (sizeof(struct { int:-!!(e); }))
>>> +
>>> +/* Force a compilation error if condition is true */
>>> +#define BUILD_BUG_ON(e) \
>>> + do { struct {int:-!!(e); } x __maybe_unused;} while(0)
>>
>> As indicated before, you should at the very least use __x as the variable
>> name.
>>
>
>The name does not matter. The scope of x is confined to the do {} while()
>and will not interfere with any local or global name.
I'm sorry to repeat this: If x is #define-d to anything but a simple identifier,
this will break no matter that it's in a private scope. The absence of any
identifier was a benefit of the sizeof() approach here.
Jan
--
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