On Tue, Feb 5, 2019 at 1:38 AM Rasmus Villemoes
wrote:
>
> On 05/02/2019 09.05, Masahiro Yamada wrote:
> > On Mon, Feb 4, 2019 at 4:24 AM Rasmus Villemoes
> > wrote:
> >> +#define static_assert(expr, ...) __static_assert(expr, ##__VA_ARGS__,
> >> #expr)
> >> +#define __static_assert(expr, msg, .
On Tue, Feb 05, 2019 at 10:53:31AM +0100, Rasmus Villemoes wrote:
> On 05/02/2019 00.12, Andrew Morton wrote:
> >>
> >> It would be (very) nice to actually use this macro in a few places so
> >> it gets its build testing while in -next.
> >
> > ie, just about every BUILD_BUG_ON in mm/ could use th
On Tue, Feb 5, 2019 at 6:39 PM Rasmus Villemoes
wrote:
>
> On 05/02/2019 09.05, Masahiro Yamada wrote:
> > On Mon, Feb 4, 2019 at 4:24 AM Rasmus Villemoes
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> BUILD_BUG_ON() is a little annoying, since it cannot be used outside
> >> function scope. So one cannot put assertions ab
On 05/02/2019 00.12, Andrew Morton wrote:
>>
>> It would be (very) nice to actually use this macro in a few places so
>> it gets its build testing while in -next.
>
> ie, just about every BUILD_BUG_ON in mm/ could use this. Let's switch
> a few?
>
Perhaps, but some make sense where they are, e.
On 05/02/2019 09.05, Masahiro Yamada wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 4, 2019 at 4:24 AM Rasmus Villemoes
> wrote:
>>
>> BUILD_BUG_ON() is a little annoying, since it cannot be used outside
>> function scope. So one cannot put assertions about the sizeof() a
>> struct next to the struct definition, but has to
On Mon, Feb 4, 2019 at 4:24 AM Rasmus Villemoes
wrote:
>
> BUILD_BUG_ON() is a little annoying, since it cannot be used outside
> function scope. So one cannot put assertions about the sizeof() a
> struct next to the struct definition, but has to hide that in some
> more or less arbitrary function
On Mon, 4 Feb 2019 15:09:16 -0800 Andrew Morton
wrote:
> On Sun, 3 Feb 2019 20:24:00 +0100 Rasmus Villemoes
> wrote:
>
> > BUILD_BUG_ON() is a little annoying, since it cannot be used outside
> > function scope. So one cannot put assertions about the sizeof() a
> > struct next to the struct
On Sun, 3 Feb 2019 20:24:00 +0100 Rasmus Villemoes
wrote:
> BUILD_BUG_ON() is a little annoying, since it cannot be used outside
> function scope. So one cannot put assertions about the sizeof() a
> struct next to the struct definition, but has to hide that in some
> more or less arbitrary func
BUILD_BUG_ON() is a little annoying, since it cannot be used outside
function scope. So one cannot put assertions about the sizeof() a
struct next to the struct definition, but has to hide that in some
more or less arbitrary function.
Since gcc 4.6 (which is now also the required minimum), there i
9 matches
Mail list logo