[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAOJsxLFv=Pq0iHrUQsK7gghhrmwBB=BqzY--RhisbjUZuLMEyg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 24 Feb 2012 12:05:56 +0200
From: Pekka Enberg <penberg@...nel.org>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
Cc: Colin Walters <walters@...bum.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org>,
Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...stprotocols.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] perf report: Add a simple GTK2-based 'perf report' browser
On Fri, Feb 24, 2012 at 11:48 AM, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu> wrote:
> * Pekka Enberg <penberg@...nel.org> wrote:
>
>> On Thu, Feb 23, 2012 at 10:33 PM, Colin Walters <walters@...bum.org> wrote:
>> >> Sure. We don't want to do that for all files. Just for the ones that
>> >> include <gtk/gtk.h>.
>> >
>> > #pragma GCC diagnostic push
>> > #pragma GCC diagnostic ignored "-Wstrict-prototypes"
>> > #include <gtk/gtk.h>
>> > #pragma GCC diagnostic pop
>>
>> It's cleaner to do it at Makefile level. We should do
>> something like sparse.git Makefile does where you can
>> optionally specify CFLAGS for individual source files.
>
> I actually like the #pragma hack because it only turns off the
> check for that broken header and keeps our checks in place for
> the rest of the .c file.
>
> Could be turned into a util/gtk.h file that is included instead
> of <gtk/gtk.h>, so that we don't have to see the #pragma
> workaround all the time?
Sure, makes sense.
--
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