linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] x86, acpi: LLVMLinux: Remove nested functions from Thinkpad ACPI

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

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

Message-ID: <20140212220116.GR18016@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
Date:	Wed, 12 Feb 2014 22:01:16 +0000
From:	Al Viro <viro@...IV.linux.org.uk>
To:	David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>
Cc:	dl9pf@....de, Behan Webster <behanw@...verseincode.com>,
	David Woodhouse <David.Woodhouse@...el.com>,
	Matthew Garrett <matthew.garrett@...ula.com>,
	ibm-acpi-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net,
	platform-driver-x86@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86, acpi: LLVMLinux: Remove nested functions from
 Thinkpad ACPI

On Wed, Feb 12, 2014 at 01:54:43PM -0800, David Rientjes wrote:

> So this patch is only as a courtesy to clang and you're not complaining 
> about things like __builtin() functions, typeof, or a ? : b conditional 
> operators because clang happens to support them?

That patch removes a disgusting construct; who cares how they'd discovered
it?  Consider it courtesy to reviewers, clang or no clang...

Folks, it's C; no need to bring Pascal misfeatures in, even if gcc happens
to accept them.
--
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/