lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2012]   [Mar]   [27]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH] perf report: Add a simple GTK2-based 'perf report' browser
On Mon, 19 Mar 2012, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote:
> Em Fri, Feb 24, 2012 at 12:05:56PM +0200, Pekka Enberg escreveu:
> > On Fri, Feb 24, 2012 at 11:48 AM, Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu> wrote:
> > > * Pekka Enberg <penberg@kernel.org> wrote:
> > >
> > >> On Thu, Feb 23, 2012 at 10:33 PM, Colin Walters <walters@verbum.org> wrote:
> > >> >> Sure. We don't want to do that for all files. Just for the ones that
> > >> >> include <gtk/gtk.h>.
> > >> >
> > >> > #pragma GCC diagnostic push
> > >> > #pragma GCC diagnostic ignored "-Wstrict-prototypes"
> > >> > #include <gtk/gtk.h>
> > >> > #pragma GCC diagnostic pop
> > >>
> > >> It's cleaner to do it at Makefile level. We should do
> > >> something like sparse.git Makefile does where you can
> > >> optionally specify CFLAGS for individual source files.
> > >
> > > I actually like the #pragma hack because it only turns off the
> > > check for that broken header and keeps our checks in place for
> > > the rest of the .c file.
> > >
> > > Could be turned into a util/gtk.h file that is included instead
> > > of <gtk/gtk.h>, so that we don't have to see the #pragma
> > > workaround all the time?
> >
> > Sure, makes sense.
>
> Using just:
>
> #pragma GCC diagnostic ignored "-Wstrict-prototypes"
> #include <gtk/gtk.h>
> #pragma GCC diagnostic error "-Wstrict-prototypes"
>
> Since push/pop was introduced in gcc 4.6, and here at the test machine
> using RHEL6.2 I have gcc 4.4.6.

Thanks for taking care of this, Arnaldo and Ingo!


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2012-03-27 12:29    [W:0.055 / U:0.116 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site