On Fri, 29 Jan, at 05:03:16PM, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
> On 29 January 2016 at 17:00, Matt Fleming <matt@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > On Fri, 29 Jan, at 10:36:03AM, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
> >> On 28 January 2016 at 23:58, Matt Fleming <matt@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >> >
> >> > Would it make more sense to #undef __init in one of the arm64 efistub
> >> > header files? I'm thinking of the case where some poor unsuspecting
> >> > developer writes a new function and marks it as __init, and we miss it
> >> > during review.
> >> >
> >>
> >> Yes, I can add it to efistub.h, and make sure it gets included in all the files
> >>
> >> Should we #undef it and #define it to a string that is easily grep'ed
> >> for, so it is easy to find the explanatory comment that goes along
> >> with it?
> >> E.g.,
> >>
> >> #define __init __init_not_supported_in_efi_stub
> >
> > This would produce a compilation failure if someone tags something as
> > __init right? Looks fine to me.
>
> Yes, but it makes the error message difficult to decipher, since
> __init is printed and not what it resolves to. Locally, I tried this,
> which seems to work:
>
> #undef __init
> #define __init __attribute__((__init_not_supported_in_efi_stub))
> #pragma GCC diagnostic error "-Wattributes"
>
> which produces
>
> CC drivers/firmware/efi/libstub/arm-stub.o
> /home/ard/linux-2.6/drivers/firmware/efi/libstub/arm-stub.c:24:1:
> error: ‘__init_not_supported_in_efi_stub’ attribute directive ignored
> [-Werror=attributes]
> {
> ^
> cc1: some warnings being treated as errors
>
> which is slightly dodgy, but at least puts the string right in the error message
What about,
#define __init __compiletime_error("__init not supported in EFI boot stub")
?
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-efi" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
