On 2018-04-18 23:21, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 18, 2018 at 1:12 AM, Martin Wilck wrote:
>>
>> No, it doesn't (gcc 7.3.0). -> https://paste.opensuse.org/27471594
>> It doesn't even warn on an expression like this:
>>
>> #define SIZE (1<<10)
>> static int foo[ilog2(SIZE)];
>
> Ok, I t
On Wed, Apr 18, 2018 at 1:12 AM, Martin Wilck wrote:
>
> No, it doesn't (gcc 7.3.0). -> https://paste.opensuse.org/27471594
> It doesn't even warn on an expression like this:
>
> #define SIZE (1<<10)
> static int foo[ilog2(SIZE)];
Ok, I think this is the "random gcc versions act differently"
On Wed, Apr 18, 2018 at 10:12:54AM +0200, Martin Wilck wrote:
> On Tue, 2018-04-17 at 17:07 -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> > On Tue, Apr 17, 2018 at 4:35 PM, Martin Wilck
> > wrote:
> > > Sparse emits errors about ilog2() in array indices because of the
> > > use of
> > > __ilog2_32() and __ilog2_
On Tue, 2018-04-17 at 17:07 -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 17, 2018 at 4:35 PM, Martin Wilck
> wrote:
> > Sparse emits errors about ilog2() in array indices because of the
> > use of
> > __ilog2_32() and __ilog2_64(),
>
> If sparse warns about it, then presumably gcc with -Wvla warns
On Tue, Apr 17, 2018 at 4:35 PM, Martin Wilck wrote:
> Sparse emits errors about ilog2() in array indices because of the use of
> __ilog2_32() and __ilog2_64(),
If sparse warns about it, then presumably gcc with -Wvla warns about it too?
And if thats the case, then __builtin_constant_p() and a t
Sparse emits errors about ilog2() in array indices because of the use of
__ilog2_32() and __ilog2_64(), rightly so
(https://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-sparse/msg03471.html).
Create a const_ilog2() variant that works with sparse for this
scenario.
(Note: checkpatch.pl complains about missing pare
6 matches
Mail list logo
