linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] Kbuild: remove -std=gnu89 from compiler arguments

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]

Message-ID: <CAK8P3a1A8Y3F93FzbWum9U=_Mc8zR9T5p=tTkQK90ARan41EbA@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Mon, 28 Feb 2022 09:11:37 +0100
From:   Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...nel.org>
To:     john@...d.stoffel.home
Cc:     Linux Kbuild mailing list <linux-kbuild@...r.kernel.org>,
        Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Masahiro Yamada <masahiroy@...nel.org>, llvm@...ts.linux.dev,
        Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
        Federico Vaga <federico.vaga@...a.pv.it>,
        Alex Shi <alexs@...nel.org>, Hu Haowen <src.res@...il.cn>,
        Michal Marek <michal.lkml@...kovi.net>,
        Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@...gle.com>,
        "open list:DOCUMENTATION" <linux-doc@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-doc-tw-discuss@...ts.sourceforge.net,
        Linux ARM <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
        Intel Graphics <intel-gfx@...ts.freedesktop.org>,
        dri-devel <dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org>,
        greybus-dev@...ts.linaro.org, linux-staging@...ts.linux.dev,
        linux-btrfs <linux-btrfs@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Kbuild: remove -std=gnu89 from compiler arguments

On Mon, Feb 28, 2022 at 1:14 AM John Stoffel <john@...d.stoffel.home> wrote:
>
> On Sun, Feb 27, 2022 at 10:52:43PM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> > From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
> >
> > During a patch discussion, Linus brought up the option of changing
> > the C standard version from gnu89 to gnu99, which allows using variable
> > declaration inside of a for() loop. While the C99, C11 and later standards
> > introduce many other features, most of these are already available in
> > gnu89 as GNU extensions as well.
> >
> > An earlier attempt to do this when gcc-5 started defaulting to
> > -std=gnu11 failed because at the time that caused warnings about
> > designated initializers with older compilers. Now that gcc-5.1 is the
> > minimum compiler version used for building kernels, that is no longer a
> > concern. Similarly, the behavior of 'inline' functions changes between
> > gnu89 and gnu89, but this was taken care of by defining 'inline' to
>
> Typo here?  Second one should be gnu99 right?


Fixed, thanks!

        Arnd