linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 01/10] compiler-gcc4.h: Reorder macros based upon gcc ver

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

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20121006174220.GB6110@liondog.tnic>
Date:	Sat, 6 Oct 2012 19:42:20 +0200
From:	Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
To:	danielfsantos@....net
Cc:	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>,
	Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@...hat.com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Christopher Li <sparse@...isli.org>,
	David Daney <david.daney@...ium.com>,
	David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>,
	David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>,
	Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>,
	Konstantin Khlebnikov <khlebnikov@...nvz.org>,
	linux-sparse@...r.kernel.org,
	Michel Lespinasse <walken@...gle.com>,
	Paul Gortmaker <paul.gortmaker@...driver.com>,
	Pavel Pisa <pisa@....felk.cvut.cz>,
	Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
	Daniel Santos <daniel.santos@...ox.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 01/10] compiler-gcc4.h: Reorder macros based upon gcc
 ver

On Fri, Oct 05, 2012 at 02:42:40PM -0500, danielfsantos@....net wrote:
> This helps to keep the file from getting confusing, removes one
> duplicate version check and should encourage future editors to put new
> macros where they belong.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Daniel Santos <daniel.santos@...ox.com>
> Acked-by: David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>
> ---
>  include/linux/compiler-gcc4.h |   20 +++++++++++---------
>  1 files changed, 11 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/include/linux/compiler-gcc4.h b/include/linux/compiler-gcc4.h
> index 8721704..4506d65 100644
> --- a/include/linux/compiler-gcc4.h
> +++ b/include/linux/compiler-gcc4.h
> @@ -13,6 +13,10 @@
>  #define __must_check 		__attribute__((warn_unused_result))
>  #define __compiler_offsetof(a,b) __builtin_offsetof(a,b)
>  
> +#if __GNUC_MINOR__ > 0
> +# define __compiletime_object_size(obj) __builtin_object_size(obj, 0)
> +#endif
> +
>  #if __GNUC_MINOR__ >= 3
>  /* Mark functions as cold. gcc will assume any path leading to a call
>     to them will be unlikely.  This means a lot of manual unlikely()s
> @@ -31,6 +35,12 @@
>  
>  #define __linktime_error(message) __attribute__((__error__(message)))
>  
> +#ifndef __CHECKER__
> +# define __compiletime_warning(message) __attribute__((warning(message)))
> +# define __compiletime_error(message) __attribute__((error(message)))
> +#endif /* __CHECKER__ */
> +#endif /* __GNUC_MINOR__ >= 3 */
> +
>  #if __GNUC_MINOR__ >= 5
>  /*
>   * Mark a position in code as unreachable.  This can be used to
> @@ -46,8 +56,7 @@
>  /* Mark a function definition as prohibited from being cloned. */
>  #define __noclone	__attribute__((__noclone__))
>  
> -#endif
> -#endif
> +#endif /* __GNUC_MINOR__ >= 5 */
>  
>  #if __GNUC_MINOR__ >= 6
>  /*
> @@ -56,10 +65,3 @@
>  #define __visible __attribute__((externally_visible))
>  #endif
>  
> -#if __GNUC_MINOR__ > 0
> -#define __compiletime_object_size(obj) __builtin_object_size(obj, 0)
> -#endif
> -#if __GNUC_MINOR__ >= 3 && !defined(__CHECKER__)

This last hunk doesn't apply since mainline has a "4" above instead of
"3". And it has had a "4" since it got added by 4a3127693001c so unless
I'm missing something, how did the 3 appear in your patches?

> -#define __compiletime_warning(message) __attribute__((warning(message)))
> -#define __compiletime_error(message) __attribute__((error(message)))
> -#endif
> -- 
> 1.7.3.4

Thanks.

-- 
Regards/Gruss,
    Boris.
--
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/