The patch titled
Subject: lib/test_hash.c: fix warning in preprocessor symbol evaluation
has been added to the -mm tree. Its filename is
test-hash-fix-warning-in-preprocessor-symbol-evaluation.patch
This patch should soon appear at
http://ozlabs.org/~akpm/mmots/broken-out/test-hash-fix-warning-in-preprocessor-symbol-evaluation.patch
and later at
http://ozlabs.org/~akpm/mmotm/broken-out/test-hash-fix-warning-in-preprocessor-symbol-evaluation.patch
Before you just go and hit "reply", please:
a) Consider who else should be cc'ed
b) Prefer to cc a suitable mailing list as well
c) Ideally: find the original patch on the mailing list and do a
reply-to-all to that, adding suitable additional cc's
*** Remember to use Documentation/SubmitChecklist when testing your code ***
The -mm tree is included into linux-next and is updated
there every 3-4 working days
------------------------------------------------------
From: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: lib/test_hash.c: fix warning in preprocessor symbol evaluation
Some versions of gcc don't like tests for the value of an undefined
preprocessor symbol, even in the #else branch of an #ifndef:
lib/test_hash.c:224:7: warning: "HAVE_ARCH__HASH_32" is not defined [-Wundef]
#elif HAVE_ARCH__HASH_32 != 1
^
lib/test_hash.c:229:7: warning: "HAVE_ARCH_HASH_32" is not defined [-Wundef]
#elif HAVE_ARCH_HASH_32 != 1
^
lib/test_hash.c:234:7: warning: "HAVE_ARCH_HASH_64" is not defined [-Wundef]
#elif HAVE_ARCH_HASH_64 != 1
^
Seen with gcc 4.9, not seen with 4.1.2.
Change the logic to only check the value inside an #ifdef to fix this.
Fixes: 468a9428521e7d00 ("<linux/hash.h>: Add support for architecture-specific functions")
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20160829214952.1334674-4-arnd@xxxxxxxx
Signed-off-by: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@xxxxxxxx>
Acked-by: George Spelvin <linux@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
---
lib/test_hash.c | 24 +++++++++++++++---------
1 file changed, 15 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
diff -puN lib/test_hash.c~test-hash-fix-warning-in-preprocessor-symbol-evaluation lib/test_hash.c
--- a/lib/test_hash.c~test-hash-fix-warning-in-preprocessor-symbol-evaluation
+++ a/lib/test_hash.c
@@ -219,21 +219,27 @@ test_hash_init(void)
}
/* Issue notices about skipped tests. */
-#ifndef HAVE_ARCH__HASH_32
- pr_info("__hash_32() has no arch implementation to test.");
-#elif HAVE_ARCH__HASH_32 != 1
+#ifdef HAVE_ARCH__HASH_32
+#if HAVE_ARCH__HASH_32 != 1
pr_info("__hash_32() is arch-specific; not compared to generic.");
#endif
-#ifndef HAVE_ARCH_HASH_32
- pr_info("hash_32() has no arch implementation to test.");
-#elif HAVE_ARCH_HASH_32 != 1
+#else
+ pr_info("__hash_32() has no arch implementation to test.");
+#endif
+#ifdef HAVE_ARCH_HASH_32
+#if HAVE_ARCH_HASH_32 != 1
pr_info("hash_32() is arch-specific; not compared to generic.");
#endif
-#ifndef HAVE_ARCH_HASH_64
- pr_info("hash_64() has no arch implementation to test.");
-#elif HAVE_ARCH_HASH_64 != 1
+#else
+ pr_info("hash_32() has no arch implementation to test.");
+#endif
+#ifdef HAVE_ARCH_HASH_64
+#if HAVE_ARCH_HASH_64 != 1
pr_info("hash_64() is arch-specific; not compared to generic.");
#endif
+#else
+ pr_info("hash_64() has no arch implementation to test.");
+#endif
pr_notice("%u tests passed.", tests);
_
Patches currently in -mm which might be from geert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx are
test-hash-fix-warning-in-two-dimensional-array-init.patch
test-hash-fix-warning-in-preprocessor-symbol-evaluation.patch
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe mm-commits" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
