From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Ian Campbell <ian.campbell@citrix.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH for-4.6] xen/public: arm: Use __typeof__
 rather than typeof
Date: Fri, 23 Oct 2015 15:31:42 +0100
Message-ID: <1445610702.2374.199.camel@citrix.com>
References: <1443986642-24392-1-git-send-email-julien.grall@citrix.com>
	<562A3295.6010901@citrix.com> <1445607059.2374.165.camel@citrix.com>
	<562A57D902000078000AE2A2@prv-mh.provo.novell.com>
	<562A3D0D.3000806@citrix.com>
	<562A5D4402000078000AE310@prv-mh.provo.novell.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Return-path: <xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org>
Received: from mail6.bemta5.messagelabs.com ([195.245.231.135])
	by lists.xen.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72)
	(envelope-from <prvs=7311588c8=Ian.Campbell@citrix.com>)
	id 1ZpdNy-0002u4-BS
	for xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org; Fri, 23 Oct 2015 14:32:02 +0000
In-Reply-To: <562A5D4402000078000AE310@prv-mh.provo.novell.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.xen.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/xen-devel>,
	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:xen-devel@lists.xen.org>
List-Help: <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.xen.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>,
	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=subscribe>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org
Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org
To: Jan Beulich <JBeulich@suse.com>, Julien Grall <julien.grall@citrix.com>
Cc: Ian Jackson <ian.jackson@eu.citrix.com>, Tim Deegan <tim@xen.org>, Keir Fraser <keir@xen.org>, Wei.Liu2@citrix.com, xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org
List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org

On Fri, 2015-10-23 at 08:16 -0600, Jan Beulich wrote:
> > > > On 23.10.15 at 15:58, <julien.grall@citrix.com> wrote:
> > On 23/10/15 14:52, Jan Beulich wrote:
> > > > > > On 23.10.15 at 15:30, <ian.campbell@citrix.com> wrote:
> > > > On Fri, 2015-10-23 at 14:13 +0100, Julien Grall wrote:
> > > > > Hi,
> > > > > 
> > > > > On 04/10/15 20:24, Julien Grall wrote:
> > > > > > The keyword typeof is not portable:
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > /usr/src/freebsd/sys/xen/hypervisor.h:93:2: error: implicit
> > > > > > declaration
> > > > > > of function 'typeof' is invalid in C99
> > > > > > [-Werror,-Wimplicit-function-declaration]
> > > > > 
> > > > > Ping? Aside the fact that other bits of the header may not be iso
> > > > > compliant, I still think this patch is valid.
> > > > 
> > > > Yes, I agree.
> > > > Acked-by: Ian Campbell <ian.campbell@citrix.com>
> > > > 
> > > > Jan, after your earlier comments are you happy to go ahead with
> > > > this for
> > > > now and sort the other possible issues separately?
> > > 
> > > Well - it's an improvement, sure, so I'm not intending to block it
> > > going in if no better way can be determined in its place right away.
> > > What makes me hesitant is that I'm not sure there indeed will be a
> > > follow up to this any time soon.
> > 
> > TBH, having a script which check the validity of the headers is not in
> > the top my todo list. Though it would be nice to have it.
> 
> No, the validating script is a nice-to-have, but nothing more. What
> I was referring to was a patch to drop the use of this gcc extension.

Then I'm confused. This patch turns a typeof into a __typeof__. In <
56126D8702000078000A80AC@prv-mh.provo.novell.com> you said "typeof() is a
gcc extension".

Are you now saying that __typeof__ also a gcc extension too?

I was under the impression that __typeof__ was standard (by some cxx at
least) and your mail reinforced that (possibly wrong) impression.

https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/Typeof.html also says that "If you are
writing a header file that must work when included in ISO C programs, write
__typeof__ instead of typeof", which also lead me to believe __typeof__ was
OK from this PoV.

Ian.