[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAHk-=win8afdcergvJ6f2=rRrff8giGUW62qmYs9Ae6aw=wcnA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 6 Dec 2024 11:15:20 -0800
From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To: David Laight <David.Laight@...lab.com>
Cc: Vincent Mailhol <vincent.mailhol@...il.com>,
Luc Van Oostenryck <luc.vanoostenryck@...il.com>, Nathan Chancellor <nathan@...nel.org>,
Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@...gle.com>, Bill Wendling <morbo@...gle.com>,
Justin Stitt <justinstitt@...gle.com>, Yury Norov <yury.norov@...il.com>,
Rasmus Villemoes <linux@...musvillemoes.dk>, Kees Cook <kees@...nel.org>,
"Gustavo A. R. Silva" <gustavoars@...nel.org>, Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@...ux.intel.com>,
Joonas Lahtinen <joonas.lahtinen@...ux.intel.com>, Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi@...el.com>,
Tvrtko Ursulin <tursulin@...ulin.net>, David Airlie <airlied@...il.com>,
Simona Vetter <simona@...ll.ch>, Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@....com>,
Mike Leach <mike.leach@...aro.org>, James Clark <james.clark@...aro.org>,
Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com>,
Rikard Falkeborn <rikard.falkeborn@...il.com>,
"linux-sparse@...r.kernel.org" <linux-sparse@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"llvm@...ts.linux.dev" <llvm@...ts.linux.dev>,
"linux-hardening@...r.kernel.org" <linux-hardening@...r.kernel.org>,
"intel-gfx@...ts.freedesktop.org" <intel-gfx@...ts.freedesktop.org>,
"dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org" <dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org>,
"coresight@...ts.linaro.org" <coresight@...ts.linaro.org>,
"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org" <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
"uecker@...raz.at" <uecker@...raz.at>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 02/10] compiler.h: add is_const() as a replacement of __is_constexpr()
On Fri, 6 Dec 2024 at 11:07, David Laight <David.Laight@...lab.com> wrote:
>
> I'm missing the compiler version and options to generate the error.
Just -Wall with most recent gcc versions seems to do it. At least I
can repro it with gcc-14.2.1 and something silly like this:
$ cat t.c
int fn(int a) { return (a<<2)?1:2; }
$ gcc -Wall -S t.c
t.c: In function ‘fn’:
t.c:1:26: warning: ‘<<’ in boolean context, did you mean ‘<’?
[-Wint-in-bool-context]
> Does a '+ 0' help? "(var << 2) + 0 ? 0 : 0"
Yeah, that actually works.
And "+0" is nice in that it should work in any context.
> #define const_NULL(x) _Generic(0 ? (x) : (char *)0, char *: 1, void *: 0)
> #define const_true(x) const_NULL((x) ? NULL : (void *)1L))
> #define const_expr(x) const_NULL((x) ? NULL : NULL))
> I send this morning.
> Needs 's/char/struct kjkjkjkjui/' applied.
Oh Christ. You really are taking this whole ugly to another level.
Linus
Powered by blists - more mailing lists