linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] objtool/x86: Replace Non-standard Range Expression in Case

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]

Message-ID: <1518925012.5730.0.camel@gmail.com>
Date:   Sun, 18 Feb 2018 09:06:52 +0530
From:   Progyan Bhattacharya <bprogyan@...il.com>
To:     Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...hat.com>
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
        Nick Desaulniers <nick.desaulniers@...il.com>,
        Lukas Bulwahn <lukas.bulwahn@...il.com>,
        Nicholas Mc Guire <der.herr@...r.at>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] objtool/x86: Replace Non-standard Range Expression in
 Case

On Fri, 2018-02-16 at 17:47 +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 16, 2018 at 08:35:11AM -0600, Josh Poimboeuf wrote:
> > On Fri, Feb 16, 2018 at 07:55:13PM +0530, Progyan Bhattacharya
> > wrote:
> > > Replace range expressions with seperate individual cases, i.e.
> > > convert case 1...3: to case 1: case 2: case 3
> > > Range expression within case statements are non-standard C code
> > > and can create issues over compiler and platform variety.
> > > 
> > > While compiling with gcc 4.8 (RHEL) I encountered this error on
> > > range expression in case statements:
> > > error: range expressions in switch statements are non-standard [-
> > > Werror=pedantic]
> > > 
> > > Signed-off-by: Progyan Bhattacharya <progyanb@....org>
> > 
> > Hi Progyan,
> > 
> > Thank you for the patch.
> > 
> > I think this makes the code unnecessarily verbose and less
> > readable.  We
> > rely on many such GCC extensions, and we don't aim to comply with
> > standard C.  And AFAIK, we don't use -Werror=pedantic in the
> > kernel.
> 
> Agreed, it makes the code actively worse. Just don't use
> error=pedantic.

But I cannot figure it out how Werror=pedantic flag is being set. :(
 
-- 
Regards,
Progyan Bhattacharya
(http://codeprogyan.me)