On Thu, 5 Jul 2007, Al Viro wrote:
On Thu, Jul 05, 2007 at 09:41:55AM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
Note that gcc rules for __attribute__() (and that's the only source
of rules we _have_ for the damn thing) clearly say that
int __user *p;
is the same thing as
int *__user p;
Quick question: is there some reason why we have to honor the crazy gcc
rules, and cannot try to convince gcc people that they are insane?
AFAICS, they started with storage-class-like attributes. Consider e.g.
always_inline or section; these are not qualifiers at all and you want
to have
static __attribute__((always_inline)) int foo(int *p);
interpreted with attribute applied to foo, not to its return type.
This is true, but I don't think this is related. attributes in GCC can
apply either to types or two decls. In this case, the always_inline
attribute is being applied to the decl, but other attributes could be
applied to the return type.
-Chris
--
http://nondot.org/sabre/
http://llvm.org/
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-sparse" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
