[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20090121172837.GA4386@uranus.ravnborg.org>
Date: Wed, 21 Jan 2009 18:28:37 +0100
From: Sam Ravnborg <sam@...nborg.org>
To: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
Cc: Helge Deller <deller@....de>, David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
jaswinder@...nel.org, mingo@...e.hu, x86@...nel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-parisc@...r.kernel.org,
Kyle McMartin <kyle@...artin.ca>
Subject: Re: Confusion in usr/include/asm-generic/fcntl.h
On Wed, Jan 21, 2009 at 01:13:16PM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Wednesday 21 January 2009, Sam Ravnborg wrote:
> > Could we add a new symbol for this?
> > We know we are going to use this in several places so a simpler variant
> > would be more readable.
> >
> > Something like:
> >
> > #ifdef __64BIT
> > ...
> > #endif
> >
> > When we define __64BIT we would use the __BITS_PER_LONG == 64 check.
>
> I would prefer using the __BITS_PER_LONG == 64 check directly, because
> it gives you a warning when __BITS_PER_LONG is undefined, whereas the
> #ifdef check gets easily fooled by include order problems. Note that
> this is not a problem in the kernel for CONFIG_* symbols which are
> always defined before the first #include.
It gives the warning only if you add -Wundef which IIRC is not default
with -Wall. And using the "__BITS_PER_LONG == 64" the risk of gitting
the expression wrong is much higher than the simpler variant where
you only write:
__64BIT
But I have no strong feelings for it.
Sam
--
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