qemu-devel.nongnu.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Daniel P. Berrange" <berrange@redhat.com>
To: Peter Maydell <peter.maydell@linaro.org>
Cc: Markus Armbruster <armbru@redhat.com>,
	QEMU Trivial <qemu-trivial@nongnu.org>,
	Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>,
	QEMU Developers <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>,
	"patches@linaro.org" <patches@linaro.org>
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] Drop QEMU_GNUC_PREREQ() checks for gcc older than 4.1
Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2017 18:11:24 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170131181124.GF20303@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAFEAcA-Ggv2VGszZg0Ld3-1wm=hVe8w=4ZcQ7TDRHf5Puq88ug@mail.gmail.com>

On Tue, Jan 31, 2017 at 06:00:13PM +0000, Peter Maydell wrote:
> On 31 January 2017 at 17:40, Markus Armbruster <armbru@redhat.com> wrote:
> > Peter Maydell <peter.maydell@linaro.org> writes:
> >
> >> We already require gcc 4.1 or newer (for the atomic
> >> support), so the fallback codepaths for older gcc
> >> versions than that are now dead code and we can
> >> just delete them.
> >>
> >> NB: clang reports itself as gcc 4.2 (regardless of
> >> clang version), so clang won't be using the fallbacks
> >> either.
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Peter Maydell <peter.maydell@linaro.org>
> >> ---
> >> For compatibility with clang we should probably try to avoid
> >> using QEMU_GNUC_PREREQ() and instead have something in
> >> compiler.h that abstracts away whether the test for "does
> >> the compiler support feature foo" is via a GCC version
> >> check or a clang __has_feature or whatever.
> >
> > Yes, testing for feature is better than testing a version.
> >
> > This patch reduces use of QEMU_GNUC_PREREQ roughly by half.  Good.
> >
> >>
> >>
> >>  include/qemu/compiler.h   |   8 ---
> >>  include/qemu/host-utils.h | 121 ----------------------------------------------
> >>  tcg/arm/tcg-target.h      |   7 ---
> >>  3 files changed, 136 deletions(-)
> >>
> >> diff --git a/include/qemu/compiler.h b/include/qemu/compiler.h
> >> index 157698b..fc12e49 100644
> >> --- a/include/qemu/compiler.h
> >> +++ b/include/qemu/compiler.h
> >> @@ -24,17 +24,9 @@
> >>
> >>  #define QEMU_NORETURN __attribute__ ((__noreturn__))
> >>
> >> -#if QEMU_GNUC_PREREQ(3, 4)
> >>  #define QEMU_WARN_UNUSED_RESULT __attribute__((warn_unused_result))
> >> -#else
> >> -#define QEMU_WARN_UNUSED_RESULT
> >> -#endif
> >
> > Should we inline this macro?
> 
> We have attributes which we wrap in QEMU_ macros already
> even though they always expand to the same thing:
> QEMU_NORETURN and QEMU_ALIGNED. I'm happy to leave these
> to follow that pattern. (If you wanted to send a patch
> series that uninlined all of those then I wouldn't hugely
> object to it, but I think it touches enough files that it's
> a separate thing from removing the #if guards that this
> patch does.)

The other option is just to replace QEMU_WARN_UNUSED_RESULT with

  #define QEMU_WARN_UNUSED_RESULT  G_GNUC_WARN_UNUSED_RESULT

and convert code to use G_GNUC_WARN_UNUSED_RESULT directly until we
can kill the QEMU specific define. There's no benefit to QEMU having
its own defines that duplicate stuff already covered by our min
required glib - G_GNUC_WARN_UNUSED_RESULT was added in 2.10 for
example.

Regards,
Daniel
-- 
|: http://berrange.com      -o-    http://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange/ :|
|: http://libvirt.org              -o-             http://virt-manager.org :|
|: http://entangle-photo.org       -o-    http://search.cpan.org/~danberr/ :|

  reply	other threads:[~2017-01-31 18:11 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2017-01-31 16:14 [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] Drop QEMU_GNUC_PREREQ() checks for gcc older than 4.1 Peter Maydell
2017-01-31 16:55 ` Daniel P. Berrange
2017-01-31 16:58   ` Peter Maydell
2017-01-31 23:27     ` Paolo Bonzini
2017-01-31 17:40 ` Markus Armbruster
2017-01-31 18:00   ` Peter Maydell
2017-01-31 18:11     ` Daniel P. Berrange [this message]
2017-01-31 18:32       ` Peter Maydell
2017-01-31 19:02         ` Markus Armbruster
2017-01-31 18:58     ` Markus Armbruster
2017-01-31 23:27   ` Paolo Bonzini
2017-02-01  6:49     ` Markus Armbruster
2017-02-02  1:09       ` Paolo Bonzini
2017-02-02 10:17         ` Markus Armbruster
2017-04-21  9:08 ` Peter Maydell

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=20170131181124.GF20303@redhat.com \
    --to=berrange@redhat.com \
    --cc=armbru@redhat.com \
    --cc=patches@linaro.org \
    --cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
    --cc=peter.maydell@linaro.org \
    --cc=qemu-devel@nongnu.org \
    --cc=qemu-trivial@nongnu.org \
    /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).