Hello linux-sparse, I was trying to run sparse against the upstream kpatch project and ran into problems with an include file that defined an "x86_64" variable: % git clone https://github.com/dynup/kpatch % cd kpatch/kpatch-build % ~/sparse/cgcc -v -MMD -MP -I../kmod/patch -Iinsn -Wall -g -Werror -c -o create-diff-object.o create-diff-object.c sparse -v --debug -MMD -MP -I../kmod/patch -Iinsn -Wall -g -Werror -c -o create-diff-object.o create-diff-object.c -Dx86_64=1 -D__x86_64=1 -D__x86_64__=1 -D__LP64__=1 -D__CHAR_BIT__=8 -D__SCHAR_MAX__=127 -D__SHRT_MAX__=32767 -D__INT_MAX__=2147483647 -D__LONG_MAX__=9223372036854775807L -D__LONG_LONG_MAX__=9223372036854775807LL -D__LONG_LONG_LONG_MAX__=170141183460469231731687303715884105727LLL -D__FLT_RADIX__=2 -D__FINITE_MATH_ONLY__=0 -D__DECIMAL_DIG__=33 -D__FLT_MANT_DIG__=24 -D__FLT_DIG__=6 -D__FLT_MIN_EXP__='(-125)' -D__FLT_MAX_EXP__=128 -D__FLT_MIN_10_EXP__='(-37)' -D__FLT_MAX_10_EXP__=38 -D__FLT_HAS_INFINITY__=1 -D__FLT_HAS_QUIET_NAN__=1 -D__FLT_DENORM_MIN__=1.40129846e-45F -D__FLT_EPSILON__=1.19209290e-7F -D__FLT_MAX__=3.40282347e+38F -D__FLT_MIN__=1.17549435e-38F -D__DBL_MANT_DIG__=53 -D__DBL_DIG__=15 -D__DBL_MIN_EXP__='(-1021)' -D__DBL_MAX_EXP__=1024 -D__DBL_MIN_10_EXP__='(-307)' -D__DBL_MAX_10_EXP__=308 -D__DBL_HAS_INFINITY__=1 -D__DBL_HAS_QUIET_NAN__=1 -D__DBL_DENORM_MIN__=4.9406564584124654e-324 -D__DBL_EPSILON__=2.2204460492503131e-16 -D__DBL_MAX__=1.7976931348623157e+308 -D__DBL_MIN__=2.2250738585072014e-308 -D__LDBL_MANT_DIG__=113 -D__LDBL_DIG__=33 -D__LDBL_MIN_EXP__='(-16381)' -D__LDBL_MAX_EXP__=16384 -D__LDBL_MIN_10_EXP__='(-4931)' -D__LDBL_MAX_10_EXP__=4932 -D__LDBL_HAS_INFINITY__=1 -D__LDBL_HAS_QUIET_NAN__=1 -D__LDBL_DENORM_MIN__=6.47517511943802511092443895822764655e-4966L -D__LDBL_EPSILON__=1.92592994438723585305597794258492732e-34L -D__LDBL_MAX__=1.18973149535723176508575932662800702e+4932L -D__LDBL_MIN__=3.36210314311209350626267781732175260e-4932L -U__SIZE_TYPE__ -D__SIZE_TYPE__=long\ unsigned\ int -D__SIZEOF_POINTER__=8 -Dunix=1 -D__unix=1 -D__unix__=1 -D__linux__=1 -D__linux=1 -Dlinux=linux -gcc-base-dir /usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-linux-gnu/5/ -multiarch-dir x86_64-linux-gnu insn/asm/insn.h:65:23: error: expected ; at end of declaration insn/asm/insn.h:65:23: error: Expected } at end of struct-union-enum-specifier insn/asm/insn.h:65:23: error: got 1 insn/asm/insn.h:69:1: error: Expected ; at the end of type declaration insn/asm/insn.h:69:1: error: got } insn/asm/insn.h:99:65: error: Expected ) in function declarator insn/asm/insn.h:99:65: error: got 1 create-diff-object.c:914:53: error: no member 'next_byte' in struct insn I can avoid this by renaming the structure member to something like "foo_x86_64". I believe the problem stems from cgcc passing "-Dx86_64" to gcc... sparse later gets confused as there is now a preprocessor variable defined with the same name. We could s/x86_64/something_else/g across the whole project to avoid this glitch, but was wondering if there was a better way. IMHO, "x86_64" is a reasonable name that a developer might want to use... I can't find any documentation that this is a (gcc) reserved keyword. Advice appreciated... thanks! -- Joe -- 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
