Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 13 Apr 2012 17:01:51 -0500 | From | Peter Seebach <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH][RESEND] do not redefine userspace's NULL #define |
| |
On Fri, 13 Apr 2012 12:39:20 -0700 Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> wrote:
> And quite frankly, kernel-external definitions of NULL have > traditionally been pure sh*t (ie plain "0" without the cast to a > pointer), so I'm not entirely convinced about this patch.
I was going to dispute this, and point out that I'm pretty sure the C++ standard specifically requires the plain-integer 0/0L definition. Then I realized this did not actually contradict your description.
Maybe the thing to do would be to ensure that NULL goes to __null, then define that to be ((void *) 0) if the compiler doesn't provide it? The magic behavior of __null seems like it'd be preferable where it is available.
-s -- Listen, get this. Nobody with a good compiler needs to be justified.
| |