On Thu, Feb 25, 2016 at 12:20:12PM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Ramsay Jones <ramsay@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > > > Signed-off-by: Ramsay Jones <ramsay@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > --- > > > > Hi Jeff, > > > > If you need to re-roll your 'jk/epipe-in-async' branch, could you > > please squash this into the relevant patch. (ie. "write_or_die: > > handle EPIPE in async threads", 24-02-2016). > > > > Thanks! > > I actually was planning to merge this to 'next' today, so I'll > squash it in without waiting for a reroll. I am OK with that. But I do find it interesting that we must mark NORETURN in both the declaration and the definition, but we don't for __attribute__((format)). > By the way, doesn't it bother anybody to give two different types to > the same function depending on NO_PTHREAD? It is not a new issue > added by this series, but async_exit() that claims to return int > does not (naturally) return anything, and sparse does not seem to > care (neither do we). It would have bothered me if I had noticed. :) It is simply a bug, and sparse (and the compiler) do not notice it because it only shows up if you compile with NO_PTHREADS=1. And I think it is added by this series: > > @@ -675,7 +675,7 @@ int in_async(void) > > return process_is_async; > > } > > > > -int async_exit(int code) > > +int NORETURN async_exit(int code) The return value on this one should be "void", too, of course. -Peff -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html