Sam Ravnborg dixit: >> Guillem Jover wrote: >> > On BSD systems __unused has traditionally been defined to mean the >> > equivalent of gcc's __attribute__((__unused__)), some parts of the […] >^__ is reserved for libc internal stuff and there is no reason to >name the unused/padding members "__unused". Considering that glibc has seen the light¹ now too, can we please do something about these now? The BSD tools (not just NetBSD®) have been using this for far longer after all… Currently (git pull --ff torvalds master), we have: • 2 occurrences of files *inside* the Linux kernel defining __unused to² __attribute__((unused)) themselves • 68 struct members and function arguments called __unused >So one or a set of patches that rename them all to something more >sensible would be fine. I think __unused0 is okay as it matches current __unused[0-9] in use by other parts of the Linux kernel – although glibc now uses __glibc_reserved[0-9], I think this doesn’t look like the Linux kernel should use it ☻☺ ① http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.lib.glibc.alpha/36439 ② I’ve recently come to the belief that this should be __attribute__((__unused__)) in all cases, i.e. all those attribute namings need double underscores before and after, as some software likes to #define printf to something else, lighttpd does #define bounded something else, so there’s probably software out there containing #define unused foo. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kbuild" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
