[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAMuHMdXkb6BH=1QvfHwMN54db9mP64KnCgoAj3aXida7-6OtPA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 30 Sep 2013 21:03:28 +0200
From: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>
To: David Daney <ddaney.cavm@...il.com>
Cc: "Pinski, Andrew" <Andrew.Pinski@...iumnetworks.com>,
Ralf Baechle <ralf@...ux-mips.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>,
Markos Chandras <Markos.Chandras@...tec.com>,
"linux-mips@...ux-mips.org" <linux-mips@...ux-mips.org>,
John Crispin <blogic@...nwrt.org>
Subject: Re: Issue with BUG() in asm-gemeric/bug.h if CONFIG_BUG=n
On Mon, Sep 30, 2013 at 7:45 PM, David Daney <ddaney.cavm@...il.com> wrote:
>> What about using __builtin_unreachable when we can but turn off warnings
>> and use do{}while(0) when __builtin_unreachable does not exist? This seems
>> the both worlds. Newer compilers produce better code with unreachable
>> anyways.
>>
>
> Simply not true.
>
> do{}while(0) is a NOP it is no more useful than an ';' statement. It
> doesn't serve as a magic uninitialized variable hiding mechanism.
You missed the "turn off warnings" part of the "and".
Gr{oetje,eeting}s,
Geert
--
Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@...ux-m68k.org
In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
-- Linus Torvalds
--
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