From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
To: "Uwe Kleine-König" <u.kleine-koenig@pengutronix.de>
Cc: Greg Ungerer <gerg@uclinux.org>,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ARM: ks8695: fix __initdata annotation
Date: Tue, 09 Feb 2016 16:10:21 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <3182431.K4Gl4054Gk@wuerfel> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20160209113624.GU13664@pengutronix.de>
On Tuesday 09 February 2016 12:36:24 Uwe Kleine-König wrote:
> Having the attribute list after the declarator isn't recommended as
> explicit as I remember having read it somewhere in the gcc docs.
>
> info gcc "Attribute Syntax"
>
> has:
>
> An attribute specifier list may appear immediately before a declarator
> (other than the first) in a comma-separated list of declarators in a
> declaration of more than one identifier using a single list of
> specifiers and qualifiers. Such attribute specifiers apply only to the
> identifier before whose declarator they appear. For example, in
>
> __attribute__((noreturn)) void d0 (void),
> __attribute__((format(printf, 1, 2))) d1 (const char *, ...),
> d2 (void)
>
> the 'noreturn' attribute applies to all the functions declared; the
> 'format' attribute only applies to 'd1'.
>
> (Funny enough, in the example the attribute specifier list doesn't
> appear *immediately* before the declarator d0.)
>
> This might be interpreted as "usually the attribute specifier list appears
> after the declarator". Other than that I cannot find an explict
> recommended placement in the docs. The examples in
>
> info gcc "Variable Attributes"
>
> always have the attribute list after the declarator.
Ok, thanks for the detailed answer, I've fixed it up locally now.
I guess I'm applying the patch in arm-soc directly at some point
and will use the line you suggested after some more testing:
static struct map_desc og_io_desc[] __initdata = {
Arnd
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: arnd@arndb.de (Arnd Bergmann)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH] ARM: ks8695: fix __initdata annotation
Date: Tue, 09 Feb 2016 16:10:21 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <3182431.K4Gl4054Gk@wuerfel> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20160209113624.GU13664@pengutronix.de>
On Tuesday 09 February 2016 12:36:24 Uwe Kleine-K?nig wrote:
> Having the attribute list after the declarator isn't recommended as
> explicit as I remember having read it somewhere in the gcc docs.
>
> info gcc "Attribute Syntax"
>
> has:
>
> An attribute specifier list may appear immediately before a declarator
> (other than the first) in a comma-separated list of declarators in a
> declaration of more than one identifier using a single list of
> specifiers and qualifiers. Such attribute specifiers apply only to the
> identifier before whose declarator they appear. For example, in
>
> __attribute__((noreturn)) void d0 (void),
> __attribute__((format(printf, 1, 2))) d1 (const char *, ...),
> d2 (void)
>
> the 'noreturn' attribute applies to all the functions declared; the
> 'format' attribute only applies to 'd1'.
>
> (Funny enough, in the example the attribute specifier list doesn't
> appear *immediately* before the declarator d0.)
>
> This might be interpreted as "usually the attribute specifier list appears
> after the declarator". Other than that I cannot find an explict
> recommended placement in the docs. The examples in
>
> info gcc "Variable Attributes"
>
> always have the attribute list after the declarator.
Ok, thanks for the detailed answer, I've fixed it up locally now.
I guess I'm applying the patch in arm-soc directly at some point
and will use the line you suggested after some more testing:
static struct map_desc og_io_desc[] __initdata = {
Arnd
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-02-09 15:10 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-02-08 14:24 [PATCH] ARM: ks8695: fix __initdata annotation Arnd Bergmann
2016-02-08 14:24 ` Arnd Bergmann
2016-02-08 23:36 ` Greg Ungerer
2016-02-08 23:36 ` Greg Ungerer
2016-02-26 16:25 ` Arnd Bergmann
2016-02-26 16:25 ` Arnd Bergmann
2016-02-09 9:00 ` Uwe Kleine-König
2016-02-09 9:00 ` Uwe Kleine-König
2016-02-09 11:14 ` Arnd Bergmann
2016-02-09 11:14 ` Arnd Bergmann
2016-02-09 11:36 ` Uwe Kleine-König
2016-02-09 11:36 ` Uwe Kleine-König
2016-02-09 15:10 ` Arnd Bergmann [this message]
2016-02-09 15:10 ` Arnd Bergmann
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=3182431.K4Gl4054Gk@wuerfel \
--to=arnd@arndb.de \
--cc=gerg@uclinux.org \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=u.kleine-koenig@pengutronix.de \
/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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.