From: George Spelvin <li...@sciencehorizons.net>
Geert Uytterhoeven <ge...@linux-m68k.org> wrote:
> Some versions of gcc don't like tests for the value of an undefined
> preprocessor symbol, even in the #else branch of an #ifndef:
Damn, I had hoped that would work universally; I tried to avoid the
uglier #if-inside-#ifdef construction. GCC 6 is quite happy wth it.
But no objections.
If you want:
Acked-by: George Spelvin <li...@sciencehorizons.net>
But here's an alternative. Geert, what do you think of this?
Acked-by: George Spelvin <li...@sciencehorizons.net>
Signed-off-by: Arnd Bergmann <a...@arndb.de>
---
lib/test_hash.c | 6 +++---
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/lib/test_hash.c b/lib/test_hash.c
index 81702ee4c41c..ddd819fec343 100644
--- a/lib/test_hash.c
+++ b/lib/test_hash.c
@@ -221,17 +221,17 @@ test_hash_init(void)
/* Issue notices about skipped tests. */
#ifndef HAVE_ARCH__HASH_32
pr_info("__hash_32() has no arch implementation to test.");
-#elif HAVE_ARCH__HASH_32 != 1
+#elif HAVE_ARCH__HASH_32 + 0 != 1
pr_info("__hash_32() is arch-specific; not compared to generic.");
#endif
#ifndef HAVE_ARCH_HASH_32
pr_info("hash_32() has no arch implementation to test.");
-#elif HAVE_ARCH_HASH_32 != 1
+#elif HAVE_ARCH_HASH_32 + 0 != 1
pr_info("hash_32() is arch-specific; not compared to generic.");
#endif
#ifndef HAVE_ARCH_HASH_64
pr_info("hash_64() has no arch implementation to test.");
-#elif HAVE_ARCH_HASH_64 != 1
+#elif HAVE_ARCH_HASH_64 + 0 != 1
pr_info("hash_64() is arch-specific; not compared to generic.");
#endif
--
2.9.0
