linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/2] test/hash: Fix warning in preprocessor symbol evaluation

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	29 May 2016 15:07:12 -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

> But here's an alternative.  Geert, what do you think of this?

Never mind; that doesn't work.  Plain gcc-4.9 passes, it, but it's the
"-Wundef" flag that the kernel uses that triggers it.

So we're back to Geert's original suggestion.
Acked-by: George Spelvin <linux@...encehorizons.net>

==>$ cat foo.c
#ifndef FOO
This is a test.
#elif FOO == 1
This is another test
#elif FOO + 0 == 1
who knows
#endif

==>$ gcc-6 -W -Wall -Wundef -E foo.c
# 1 "foo.c"
# 1 "<built-in>"
# 1 "<command-line>"
# 31 "<command-line>"
# 1 "/usr/include/stdc-predef.h" 1 3 4
# 32 "<command-line>" 2
# 1 "foo.c"

This is a test.

==>$ gcc-4.9 -W -Wall -Wundef -E foo.c
# 1 "foo.c"
# 1 "<built-in>"
# 1 "<command-line>"
# 1 "/usr/include/stdc-predef.h" 1 3 4
# 1 "<command-line>" 2
# 1 "foo.c"

foo.c:3:7: warning: "FOO" is not defined [-Wundef]
 #elif FOO == 1
       ^
foo.c:5:7: warning: "FOO" is not defined [-Wundef]
 #elif FOO + 0 == 1
       ^
This is a test.