From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S263478AbTJLMTa (ORCPT ); Sun, 12 Oct 2003 08:19:30 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S263479AbTJLMTa (ORCPT ); Sun, 12 Oct 2003 08:19:30 -0400 Received: from mail.jlokier.co.uk ([81.29.64.88]:38286 "EHLO mail.shareable.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S263478AbTJLMT3 (ORCPT ); Sun, 12 Oct 2003 08:19:29 -0400 Date: Sun, 12 Oct 2003 13:18:44 +0100 From: Jamie Lokier To: Andrew Morton Cc: William Lee Irwin III , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: current_is_kswapd is a function Message-ID: <20031012121844.GF13427@mail.shareable.org> References: <20031012021750.GA772@holomorphy.com> <20031012050223.0d270c8f.akpm@osdl.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20031012050223.0d270c8f.akpm@osdl.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Andrew Morton wrote: > It would probably be worthwhile teaching the compiler to generate a warning > in this case; I doubt if anyone is likely to want to find out at runtime > whether the linker happened to place a particular function at address zero. > I shall suggest that. I agree it would be a very useful warning. Testing the address is useful occasionally, to ask whether the target of a weak linkage reference was linked in, so a syntax is needed to suppress the warning, such as "&function != 0". -- Jamie