[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20200219195424.GW31668@ziepe.ca>
Date: Wed, 19 Feb 2020 15:54:24 -0400
From: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...pe.ca>
To: Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@...gle.com>
Cc: Nathan Chancellor <natechancellor@...il.com>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
Masahiro Yamada <masahiroy@...nel.org>,
Michal Marek <michal.lkml@...kovi.net>,
Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
Jason Baron <jbaron@...mai.com>,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux Kbuild mailing list <linux-kbuild@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-arch <linux-arch@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux Memory Management List <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
clang-built-linux <clang-built-linux@...glegroups.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/6] tracing: Wrap section comparison in
tracer_alloc_buffers with COMPARE_SECTIONS
On Wed, Feb 19, 2020 at 11:11:19AM -0800, Nick Desaulniers wrote:
> > Godbolt says clang is happy if it is written as:
> >
> > if (&__stop___trace_bprintk_fmt[0] != &__start___trace_bprintk_fmt[0])
> >
> > Which is probably the best compromise. The type here is const char
> > *[], so it would be a shame to see it go.
>
> If the "address" is never dereferenced, but only used for arithmetic
> (in a way that the the pointed to type is irrelevant), does the
> pointed to type matter?
The type is used here:
if (*pos < start_index)
return __start___trace_bprintk_fmt + *pos;
The return expression should be a const char **
Presumably the caller of find_next derferences it.
Jason
Powered by blists - more mailing lists