From: Al Viro <viro@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
Cc: Vegard Nossum <vegard.nossum@gmail.com>,
Alexander Viro <viro@ftp.linux.org.uk>,
Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>,
Christopher Li <sparse@chrisli.org>,
linux-sparse@vger.kernel.org, Hannes Eder <hannes@hanneseder.net>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Nasal demons in preprocessor use (Re: [PATCH] test-suite: new preprocessor test case)
Date: Fri, 20 Mar 2009 19:14:07 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20090320191407.GI28946@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20090320190409.GH28946@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
On Fri, Mar 20, 2009 at 07:04:09PM +0000, Al Viro wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 20, 2009 at 07:08:53PM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> >
> > * Vegard Nossum <vegard.nossum@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > I guess this means that kmemcheck branch should be withdrawn from
> > > linux-next, at least temporarily, as I have no immediate
> > > workarounds/alternatives. Stephen, can you drop it?
> >
> > Al Viro, well done :-(
> >
> > Ingo
>
> What the fuck?
While we are at it, there *is* an obvious workaround:
#ifdef ...
#define L1 <list>
#else
#define L1
#endif
#ifdef ...
#define L2 <list>
#else
#define L2
#endif
your_macro(...
L1
L2
...)
#undef L1
#undef L2
Ingo, care to explain what the hell had your reply above been about?
Especially since we both apparently agree that code in question did
need fixing, what with your immediate ACK upthread...
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-03-20 19:14 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-03-19 17:56 [PATCH] test-suite: new preprocessor test case Hannes Eder
2009-03-19 18:26 ` Al Viro
2009-03-19 18:51 ` Hannes Eder
2009-03-19 19:07 ` Nasal demons in preprocessor use (Re: [PATCH] test-suite: new preprocessor test case) Al Viro
2009-03-19 19:27 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-03-19 19:39 ` Al Viro
2009-03-19 20:20 ` Vegard Nossum
2009-03-19 22:07 ` Stephen Rothwell
2009-03-20 18:08 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-03-20 19:04 ` Al Viro
2009-03-20 19:14 ` Al Viro [this message]
2009-03-20 23:16 ` Vegard Nossum
2009-03-20 23:44 ` Al Viro
2009-03-21 8:34 ` Johannes Berg
2009-03-27 3:13 ` H. Peter Anvin
2009-03-19 19:24 ` [PATCH] test-suite: new preprocessor test case Derek M Jones
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20090320191407.GI28946@ZenIV.linux.org.uk \
--to=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
--cc=hannes@hanneseder.net \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-sparse@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=sfr@canb.auug.org.au \
--cc=sparse@chrisli.org \
--cc=vegard.nossum@gmail.com \
--cc=viro@ftp.linux.org.uk \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).