[lkml]   [2007]   [Jul]   [5]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    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.


    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to
    More majordomo info at
    Please read the FAQ at

     \ /
      Last update: 2007-07-05 19:21    [W:0.019 / U:22.460 seconds]
    ©2003-2017 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site