Re: [PATCH 16/16] fix handling of integer constant expressions

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Hopefully correct handling of integer constant expressions. Please, review.

Heh...  The first catches are lovely:
                 struct fxsrAlignAssert {
                         int _:!(offsetof(struct task_struct,
                                         thread.i387.fxsave) & 15);
                 };

That's...  wow?

#define _IOC_TYPECHECK(t) \
        ((sizeof(t) == sizeof(t[1]) && \
          sizeof(t) < (1 << _IOC_SIZEBITS)) ? \
          sizeof(t) : __invalid_size_argument_for_IOC)
poisoning _IOW() et.al., so those who do something like

static const char *v4l1_ioctls[] = {
        [_IOC_NR(VIDIOCGCAP)]       = "VIDIOCGCAP",

run into trouble.

The only reason that doesn't break gcc to hell and back is
that gcc has unfixed bugs in that area.

If I understand correctly what bugs you are talking about,
most (all?) of those were solved in the dark ages already
(i.e., the 3.x series).

It certainly is not a valid C

Why not?  Nothing in the C standard says all your externs
have to be defined in some other translation unit you link
with AFAIK.

or even a remotely sane one.

It's unusual at least :-)


Segher

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

[Index of Archives]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Photo]     [Stuff]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Video 4 Linux]     [Linux for the blind]     [Linux Resources]
  Powered by Linux