On Oct 05, 2006, at 06:05:16, Jeff Garzik wrote:
Ingo Molnar wrote:
A small suggestion: to give GCC folks a chance to actually fix
this, could we actively annotate these places instead of working
them around?
There was a patch posted in the past, mentioned in the thread
discussed my #gccbug branch, that permitted annotations with zero
code size changes. I think that sort of annotation approach would
be preferred. It was something like
#define noinit_warning(x) \
do { (void) (x) = (x); } while (0)
but given my memory, that's probably all wrong.
The simplest way given the current GCC feature-set is:
#ifdef HIDE_GCC_FALSE_POSITIVES
# define correct_init(x) x = x
#else
# define correct_init(x) x
#endif
Then:
int correct_init(arg);
struct some_struct correct_init(foo);
Alternatively if only some struct member has problems and the rest
are OK:
struct some_struct foo;
correct_init(foo.bar);
Cheers,
Kyle Moffett
-
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]
