lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2007]   [Jul]   [5]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: [RFC] bloody mess with __attribute__() syntax
    On Thu, 5 Jul 2007, Al Viro wrote:
    > On Thu, Jul 05, 2007 at 09:41:55AM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
    >>> Note that gcc rules for __attribute__() (and that's the only source
    >>> of rules we _have_ for the damn thing) clearly say that
    >>> int __user *p;
    >>> is the same thing as
    >>> int *__user p;
    >>
    >> Quick question: is there some reason why we have to honor the crazy gcc
    >> rules, and cannot try to convince gcc people that they are insane?
    >
    > AFAICS, they started with storage-class-like attributes. Consider e.g.
    > always_inline or section; these are not qualifiers at all and you want
    > to have
    > static __attribute__((always_inline)) int foo(int *p);
    > interpreted with attribute applied to foo, not to its return type.

    This is true, but I don't think this is related. attributes in GCC can
    apply either to types or two decls. In this case, the always_inline
    attribute is being applied to the decl, but other attributes could be
    applied to the return type.

    -Chris

    --
    http://nondot.org/sabre/
    http://llvm.org/
    -
    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: 2007-07-05 19:21    [W:0.033 / U:29.796 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site