[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20110623181317.GA26945@infradead.org>
Date: Thu, 23 Jun 2011 14:13:17 -0400
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
To: Al Viro <viro@...IV.linux.org.uk>
Cc: Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>,
Maarten Lankhorst <m.b.lankhorst@...il.com>,
Alex Elder <aelder@....com>, xfs-masters@....sgi.com,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
xfs@....sgi.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] xfs: Silence bounds checking compiler warning
On Thu, Jun 23, 2011 at 06:55:33PM +0100, Al Viro wrote:
> ... and even better is to write in real C and have u8 name[]; in the
> end of your structure. That's the standard C99 for this kind of thing
> (see 6.7.2.1p2, p16). Zero-sized array is a gccism predating standard
> flexible array members and since the standard syntax is accepted by
> any gcc version that might be recent enough to build the kernel...
The situation is even more nasty - the one sized fake flex-array
actually is in the middle of the structure. Besides sizeof-expressions
taking the one member array into account only members before the
variable sized array are used. I've started a series cleaning up the
few structures that were done that way (for whatever reason), but it's
pretty intrusive. I don't think papering over these warnings at this
point is a good idea.
--
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