On Wed, Oct 16, 2019 at 09:01:26AM -0700, Dmitry Torokhov wrote: > On Wed, Oct 16, 2019 at 10:48:57AM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > > On Tue, Oct 15, 2019 at 11:25:53AM -0700, Dmitry Torokhov wrote: > > You store a value as union, but going to read as a member of union? > > I'm pretty sure it breaks standard rules. > > No, I move the values _in place_ of the union, and the data is always > fetched via void pointers. And copying data via char * or memcpy() is > allowed even in C99 and C11. > > But I am wondering why are we actually worrying about all of this? The > kernel is gnu89 and I think is going to stay this way because we use > initializers with a cast in a lot of places: > > #define __RAW_SPIN_LOCK_UNLOCKED(lockname) \ > (raw_spinlock_t) __RAW_SPIN_LOCK_INITIALIZER(lockname) > > and C99 and gnu99 do not allow this. See > https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20141019231031.GB9319@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/ This is simple not a cast. -- With Best Regards, Andy Shevchenko
