| lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
|
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Tue, 29 Sep 2009 16:39:32 -0700 From: Hollis Blanchard <hollisb@...ibm.com> To: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@...ell.com> Cc: sfr@...b.auug.org.au, akpm@...ux-foundation.org, linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org, kvm-ppc@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-next@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: linux-next: tree build failure On Tue, 2009-09-29 at 10:28 +0100, Jan Beulich wrote: > >>> Hollis Blanchard 09/29/09 2:00 AM >>> > >First, I think there is a real bug here, and the code should read like > >this (to match the comment): > > /* type has to be known at build time for optimization */ > >- BUILD_BUG_ON(__builtin_constant_p(type)); > >+ BUILD_BUG_ON(!__builtin_constant_p(type)); > > > >However, I get the same build error *both* ways, i.e. > >__builtin_constant_p(type) evaluates to both 0 and 1? Either that, or > >the new BUILD_BUG_ON() macro isn't working... > > No, at this point of the compilation process it's neither zero nor one, > it's simply considered non-constant by the compiler at that stage > (this builtin is used for optimization, not during parsing, and the > error gets generated when the body of the function gets parsed, > not when code gets generated from it). I think I see what you're saying. Do you have a fix to suggest? -- Hollis Blanchard IBM Linux Technology Center -- 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