[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAK7LNARdX2nQMsdaua3qi7k3TpAs4APrUXm3rBrj6Y02xOmp_w@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 4 Jun 2019 22:32:17 +0900
From: Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@...ionext.com>
To: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
Cc: Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>,
Linux Media Mailing List <linux-media@...r.kernel.org>,
Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@...nel.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...radead.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] media: do not use C++ style comments in uapi headers
On Tue, Jun 4, 2019 at 9:48 PM Masahiro Yamada
<yamada.masahiro@...ionext.com> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Jun 4, 2019 at 8:55 PM Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de> wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, Jun 4, 2019 at 1:23 PM Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Tue, 2019-06-04 at 20:13 +0900, Masahiro Yamada wrote:
> > > > On the other hand, uapi headers are written in more strict C, where
> > > > the C++ comment style is forbidden.
> > >
> > > Is this a real problem for any toolchain?
> >
> > There is likely some code that is built with -Wpedandic -Werror --std=c89
> > or similar. Since glibc allows this combination for its own headers, it seems
> > best to also allow it in kernel headers that may be included by libc headers
> > or by applications, at least where it does not hurt.
> >
> > Realistically though, we probably assume c99 or gnu89 in user space
> > headers anyway, since there is no 'long long' in earlier standards.
> >
> > Arnd
>
> In fact, I detected this issue by the following patch:
> https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/10974669/
>
> When I worked on it, I wondered which
> c-dialect flags should be used.
>
> This code:
>
> > # Unlike the kernel space, uapi headers are written in more strict C.
> > # - Forbid C++ style comments
> > # - Use '__inline', '__asm__' instead of 'inline', 'asm'
> > #
> > # -std=c90 (equivalent to -ansi) catches the violation of those.
> > # We cannot go as far as adding -Wpedantic since it emits too many warnings.
> > #
> > # REVISIT: re-consider the proper set of compiler flags for uapi compile-test.
> >
> > UAPI_CFLAGS := -std=c90 -Wpedantic -Wall -Werror=implicit-function-declaration
I got rid of -Wpedantic in the submitted patch.
Sorry if I confused you.
--
Best Regards
Masahiro Yamada
Powered by blists - more mailing lists