[<prev] [next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.LFD.2.00.0904291137300.9262@localhost.localdomain>
Date: Wed, 29 Apr 2009 11:46:59 -0400 (EDT)
From: "Robert P. J. Day" <rpjday@...shcourse.ca>
To: Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: "(unsigned long)__builtin_return_address(0)", _RET_IP_,
CALLER_ADDR0?
as another possibility for standardizing code, is there a standard
for the simplification mentioned in the subject and documented here:
http://www.crashcourse.ca/wiki/index.php/The_style_script#Testing_for_.22.28unsigned_long.29__builtin_return_address.280.29.22_simplification
it's a bit confusing that, even within the kernel/ directory, all
three constructs are used, even sometimes being mixed in the same
source file, which is really more confusing than it has to be.
is there a standard?
rday
--
========================================================================
Robert P. J. Day Waterloo, Ontario, CANADA
Linux Consulting, Training and Annoying Kernel Pedantry.
Web page: http://crashcourse.ca
Linked In: http://www.linkedin.com/in/rpjday
Twitter: http://twitter.com/rpjday
========================================================================
--
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