[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20160529185355.12968.qmail@ns.sciencehorizons.net>
Date: 29 May 2016 14:53:55 -0400
From: "George Spelvin" <linux@...encehorizons.net>
To: geert@...ux-m68k.org, linux@...encehorizons.net,
torvalds@...ux-foundation.org
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] test/hash: Fix warning in preprocessor symbol evaluation
Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org> wrote:
> Some versions of gcc don't like tests for the value of an undefined
> preprocessor symbol, even in the #else branch of an #ifndef:
Damn, I had hoped that would work universally; I tried to avoid the
uglier #if-inside-#ifdef construction. GCC 6 is quite happy wth it.
But no objections.
If you want:
Acked-by: George Spelvin <linux@...encehorizons.net>
But here's an alternative. Geert, what do you think of this?
diff --git a/lib/test_hash.c b/lib/test_hash.c
index c9549c8b..8ea1d2ca 100644
--- a/lib/test_hash.c
+++ b/lib/test_hash.c
@@ -221,17 +221,17 @@ test_hash_init(void)
/* Issue notices about skipped tests. */
#ifndef HAVE_ARCH__HASH_32
pr_info("__hash_32() has no arch implementation to test.");
-#elif HAVE_ARCH__HASH_32 != 1
+#elif HAVE_ARCH__HASH_32 + 0 != 1
pr_info("__hash_32() is arch-specific; not compared to generic.");
#endif
#ifndef HAVE_ARCH_HASH_32
pr_info("hash_32() has no arch implementation to test.");
-#elif HAVE_ARCH_HASH_32 != 1
+#elif HAVE_ARCH_HASH_32 + 0 != 1
pr_info("hash_32() is arch-specific; not compared to generic.");
#endif
#ifndef HAVE_ARCH_HASH_64
pr_info("hash_64() has no arch implementation to test.");
-#elif HAVE_ARCH_HASH_64 != 1
+#elif HAVE_ARCH_HASH_64 + 0 != 1
pr_info("hash_64() is arch-specific; not compared to generic.");
#endif
Powered by blists - more mailing lists