From: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com>
To: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
Cc: Markus Armbruster <armbru@redhat.com>,
qemu-devel@nongnu.org, Peter Maydell <peter.maydell@linaro.org>,
Richard Henderson <rth@twiddle.net>
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v3 2/4] compiler: rework BUG_ON using a struct
Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2017 19:45:40 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170120194511-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <024df752-27f3-88f3-99a3-a7f5e18069b4@redhat.com>
On Fri, Jan 20, 2017 at 06:09:52PM +0100, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>
>
> On 20/01/2017 17:57, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> > On Fri, Jan 20, 2017 at 08:42:41AM +0100, Markus Armbruster wrote:
> >> "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com> writes:
> >>
> >>> There are theoretical concerns that some compilers might not trigger
> >>> build failures on attempts to define an array of size -1 and make it a
> >>> variable sized array instead. Let rewrite using a struct with a negative
> >>> bit field size instead as there are no dynamic bit field sizes. This is
> >>> similar to what Linux does.
> >>>
> >>> Signed-off-by: Michael S. Tsirkin <mst@redhat.com>
> >>> ---
> >>> include/qemu/compiler.h | 9 ++++++---
> >>> 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> >>>
> >>> diff --git a/include/qemu/compiler.h b/include/qemu/compiler.h
> >>> index 7512082..c6f673e 100644
> >>> --- a/include/qemu/compiler.h
> >>> +++ b/include/qemu/compiler.h
> >>> @@ -85,9 +85,12 @@
> >>> #define typeof_field(type, field) typeof(((type *)0)->field)
> >>> #define type_check(t1,t2) ((t1*)0 - (t2*)0)
> >>>
> >>> -#define QEMU_BUILD_BUG_ON(x) \
> >>> - typedef char glue(qemu_build_bug_on__, __LINE__)[(x) ? -1 : 1] \
> >>> - __attribute__((unused))
> >>> +#define QEMU_BUILD_BUG_ON_STRUCT(x) \
> >>> + struct { \
> >>> + int qemu_build_bug_on : (x) ? -1 : 1; \
> >>> + }
> >>
> >> The qemu_build_bug_on name space pollution is harmless, but quite
> >> unnecessary: the name can be simply omitted (unnamed bit-field).
> >
> > I have concerns about it's portability though. I remember
> > we had to get rid of unnamed fields in some structs at some point
> > for the sake of some old compiler.
>
> Unnamed bitfields are in C89 and we definitely use unnamed unions.
> Maybe that was an unnamed struct or scalar.
>
> Paolo
I don't think we use unnamed bitfields anywhere though. do we?
> >>> +#define QEMU_BUILD_BUG_ON(x) typedef QEMU_BUILD_BUG_ON_STRUCT(x) \
> >>> + glue(qemu_build_bug_on__, __LINE__) __attribute__((unused))
> >>>
> >>> #if defined __GNUC__
> >>> # if !QEMU_GNUC_PREREQ(4, 4)
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-01-20 17:45 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 25+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-01-19 21:07 [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v3 0/4] ARRAY_SIZE fixups Michael S. Tsirkin
2017-01-19 21:07 ` [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v3 1/4] compiler: drop ; after BUILD_BUG_ON Michael S. Tsirkin
2017-01-19 21:22 ` Eric Blake
2017-01-19 21:07 ` [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v3 2/4] compiler: rework BUG_ON using a struct Michael S. Tsirkin
2017-01-19 21:26 ` Eric Blake
2017-01-20 7:44 ` Markus Armbruster
2017-01-20 7:42 ` Markus Armbruster
2017-01-20 16:57 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2017-01-20 17:09 ` Paolo Bonzini
2017-01-20 17:45 ` Michael S. Tsirkin [this message]
2017-01-20 18:33 ` Markus Armbruster
2017-01-20 9:41 ` Dr. David Alan Gilbert
2017-01-20 14:36 ` Eric Blake
2017-01-20 14:53 ` Dr. David Alan Gilbert
2017-01-19 21:07 ` [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v3 3/4] compiler: expression version of QEMU_BUILD_BUG_ON Michael S. Tsirkin
2017-01-19 21:28 ` Eric Blake
2017-01-19 21:07 ` [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v3 4/4] ARRAY_SIZE: check that argument is an array Michael S. Tsirkin
2017-01-19 21:59 ` Eric Blake
2017-01-19 22:11 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2017-01-19 23:00 ` Eric Blake
2017-01-20 7:34 ` Markus Armbruster
2017-01-20 12:20 ` Paolo Bonzini
2017-01-20 7:45 ` [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v3 0/4] ARRAY_SIZE fixups Markus Armbruster
2017-01-20 14:57 ` no-reply
2017-01-20 15:15 ` no-reply
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=20170120194511-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org \
--to=mst@redhat.com \
--cc=armbru@redhat.com \
--cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
--cc=peter.maydell@linaro.org \
--cc=qemu-devel@nongnu.org \
--cc=rth@twiddle.net \
/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).