lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2006]   [Oct]   [5]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
SubjectRe: make-bogus-warnings-go-away tree [was: 2.6.18-mm3]
Date
On Oct 05, 2006, at 06:05:16, Jeff Garzik wrote:
> Ingo Molnar wrote:
>> A small suggestion: to give GCC folks a chance to actually fix
>> this, could we actively annotate these places instead of working
>> them around?
>
> There was a patch posted in the past, mentioned in the thread
> discussed my #gccbug branch, that permitted annotations with zero
> code size changes. I think that sort of annotation approach would
> be preferred. It was something like
>
> #define noinit_warning(x) \
> do { (void) (x) = (x); } while (0)
>
> but given my memory, that's probably all wrong.

The simplest way given the current GCC feature-set is:

#ifdef HIDE_GCC_FALSE_POSITIVES
# define correct_init(x) x = x
#else
# define correct_init(x) x
#endif

Then:

int correct_init(arg);
struct some_struct correct_init(foo);

Alternatively if only some struct member has problems and the rest
are OK:

struct some_struct foo;
correct_init(foo.bar);

Cheers,
Kyle Moffett

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2006-10-05 22:57    [W:0.815 / U:0.152 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site