const versus __attribute__((const))

["H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>]

I have been chasing down a bunch of warnings that have been annoying
me, and I have observed that a bunch of the byteorder functions are
defined in ways similar to:

static __inline__ __const__ __u16 ___arch__swab16(__u16 value)

With -W -Wall at least gcc 3.2.2 will issue a warning:

warning: type qualifiers ignored on function return type

... which seems to imply the __const__ is ignored.  Reading the gcc
documentation it appears the correct syntax is
__attribute__((__const__)) rather than __const__.

I have made a patch against the current tree defining
__attribute_const__ in <linux/compiler.h> and using it in the above
cases; does anyone know any reason why I should *NOT* submit this to
Linus?

	-hpa
-- 
<hpa@transmeta.com> at work, <hpa@zytor.com> in private!
If you send me mail in HTML format I will assume it's spam.
"Unix gives you enough rope to shoot yourself in the foot."
Architectures needed: ia64 m68k mips64 ppc ppc64 s390 s390x sh v850 x86-64