From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Luc Van Oostenryck Subject: Re: [PATCH] correct sparcv9 defines Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2020 23:48:01 +0100 Message-ID: <20200122224801.piocizxa45ejy3zg@ltop.local> References: <20200120103824.20746-1-john.levon@joyent.com> <20200121001322.zikj2xsacqt765fi@ltop.local> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from mail-wm1-f65.google.com ([209.85.128.65]:50964 "EHLO mail-wm1-f65.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1725884AbgAVWsG (ORCPT ); Wed, 22 Jan 2020 17:48:06 -0500 Received: by mail-wm1-f65.google.com with SMTP id a5so491898wmb.0 for ; Wed, 22 Jan 2020 14:48:04 -0800 (PST) Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-sparse-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-sparse@vger.kernel.org To: Toomas Soome Cc: John Levon , linux-sparse@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Jan 22, 2020 at 12:53:58PM +0200, Toomas Soome wrote: > > On 21. Jan 2020, at 02:13, Luc Van Oostenryck wrote: > > > > Thanks for the patch. > > Is it possible to have Toomas' Signed-off-by for this patch? > > No need to resend the patch, just a reply to this email > > saying it's OK is enough. > > OK by me:) > > > > >> case MACH_SPARC32: > >> predefine("__sparc__", 1, "1"); > >> predefine("__sparc", 1, "1"); > >> + predefine("sparc", 1, "1"); > > > > I'm wondering if there is a real need for this one or if > > it's just to reflect what GCC do? I'm a bit reluctant to > > add it since it lies in the user's namespace. But I'm fine > > to add it if there is a real use case for it (in which case > > I'll just slightly change the patch to not predefine it if > > one of the ISO dialect is selected (via --std=c99, ...)). > > > > > The problem is that gcc does define those symbols and the code is using them, hence smatch should behave the same: OK, fine for me if the symbol is effectively used. This patch and John's are applied and pushed with some adaptations for a related pending branch I merged first. Thanks, -- Luc