linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] Makefile: Yes. Finally remove '-Wdeclaration-after-statement'

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] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Mon, 17 Aug 2020 22:42:24 +0200
From:   Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>
To:     Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>
Cc:     Michael Witten <mfwitten@...il.com>,
        Masahiro Yamada <masahiroy@...nel.org>,
        Michal Marek <michal.lkml@...kovi.net>,
        Cong Wang <xiyou.wangcong@...il.com>,
        Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>,
        Sam Ravnborg <sam@...nborg.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kbuild@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Makefile: Yes. Finally remove
 '-Wdeclaration-after-statement'

Hi!

> > This is not just a matter of style; this is a matter of semantics,
> > especially with regard to:
> > 
> >   * const Correctness.
> >     A const-declared variable must be initialized when defined.
> > 
> >   * Conditional Compilation.
> >     When there is complex interaction between compile-time
> >     configuration options, it's essential to be able to
> >     make declarations where needed; otherwise unnecessary
> >     gymnastics are required to silence the compiler.
> > 
> > Gentleman... Just let people say exactly what they mean to say.
..

> You obviously need every bit of help in that task, judging by the amount
> of clarity (or thoughts, for that matter) visible in the spew above...
> 
> NAK.  And as for letting people say exactly what they mean to say...
> I am tempted to take you on that invitation, but that would be cruel
> to gregkh - he would have to reply to inevitable screeds about
> CoC-violating postings on l-k.

We should really get rid of CoC, because I'd really like to see you
_not_ resist that temptation.

But... he's right.

With rust-like programming style with widespread consts, this warning
has to go. And it is causing additional/ugly #ifdefs in some cases.

Maybe author can show examples in kernel .c where disabling the
warning would lead to nicer code. I believe we should give it a try.

									Pavel
-- 
(english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
(cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html

Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (182 bytes)