Re: [Bulk] Re: [PATCH 4/10] compiler-gcc{3,4}.h: Use GCC_VERSION macro

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Fri, Sep 28, 2012 at 07:31:53PM -0500, Daniel Santos wrote:
> On 09/28/2012 07:20 PM, Josh Triplett wrote:
> > On Fri, Sep 28, 2012 at 06:20:05PM -0500, Daniel Santos wrote:
> >> --- a/include/linux/compiler-gcc4.h
> >> +++ b/include/linux/compiler-gcc4.h
> >> @@ -13,11 +13,11 @@
> >>  #define __must_check 		__attribute__((warn_unused_result))
> >>  #define __compiler_offsetof(a,b) __builtin_offsetof(a,b)
> >>  
> >> -#if __GNUC_MINOR__ > 0
> >> +#if GCC_VERSION >= 40102
> >>  # define __compiletime_object_size(obj) __builtin_object_size(obj, 0)
> >>  #endif
> > You've changed the semantics of this one; if literally translated, this
> > should have become #if GCC_VERSION >= 40100.  If you intended to change
> > that, could you please document why?  And in any case, could you make
> > that semantic change in a separate commit from the switch to
> > GCC_VERSION?
> hmm, it looks like somebody commented out the #error that would normally
> prevent that test from ever occurring on 4.1.0 or 4.1.1.
> When I had written this patch, it wasn't commented out and I had assumed
> that it was obvious from the context.

GCC 4.1.0 and 4.1.1 miscompiling __weak has nothing to do with
__compiletime_object_size; why should *this* version check exclude those
versions?

- Josh Triplett
--
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


[Index of Archives]     [Newbies FAQ]     [LKML]     [IETF Annouce]     [DCCP]     [Netdev]     [Networking]     [Security]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux SCSI]     [Trinity Fuzzer Tool]

  Powered by Linux