From: Guenter Roeck <linux@roeck-us.net>
To: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@kernel.org>
Cc: linux-kbuild@vger.kernel.org, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
Masahiro Yamada <masahiroy@kernel.org>,
llvm@lists.linux.dev, Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>,
Federico Vaga <federico.vaga@vaga.pv.it>,
Alex Shi <alexs@kernel.org>, Hu Haowen <src.res@email.cn>,
Michal Marek <michal.lkml@markovi.net>,
Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@google.com>,
linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-doc-tw-discuss@lists.sourceforge.net,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org, dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org,
greybus-dev@lists.linaro.org, linux-staging@lists.linux.dev,
linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] [v2] Kbuild: move to -std=gnu11
Date: Mon, 16 May 2022 06:10:23 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20220516131023.GA2329080@roeck-us.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20220228103142.3301082-1-arnd@kernel.org>
On Mon, Feb 28, 2022 at 11:27:43AM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
>
> During a patch discussion, Linus brought up the option of changing
> the C standard version from gnu89 to gnu99, which allows using variable
> declaration inside of a for() loop. While the C99, C11 and later standards
> introduce many other features, most of these are already available in
> gnu89 as GNU extensions as well.
The downside is that backporting affected patches to older kernel branches
now fails with error messages such as
mm/kfence/core.c: In function ‘kfence_init_pool’:
mm/kfence/core.c:595:2: error: ‘for’ loop initial declarations are only allowed in C99 or C11 mode
Just something to keep in mind when writing patches.
Guenter
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Guenter Roeck <linux@roeck-us.net>
To: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@kernel.org>
Cc: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
Michal Marek <michal.lkml@markovi.net>,
linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>,
Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>,
linux-staging@lists.linux.dev,
Masahiro Yamada <masahiroy@kernel.org>,
llvm@lists.linux.dev, Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@google.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org,
greybus-dev@lists.linaro.org, Alex Shi <alexs@kernel.org>,
Federico Vaga <federico.vaga@vaga.pv.it>,
Hu Haowen <src.res@email.cn>,
intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org, linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
linux-doc-tw-discuss@lists.sourceforge.net,
linux-kbuild@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] [v2] Kbuild: move to -std=gnu11
Date: Mon, 16 May 2022 06:10:23 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20220516131023.GA2329080@roeck-us.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20220228103142.3301082-1-arnd@kernel.org>
On Mon, Feb 28, 2022 at 11:27:43AM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
>
> During a patch discussion, Linus brought up the option of changing
> the C standard version from gnu89 to gnu99, which allows using variable
> declaration inside of a for() loop. While the C99, C11 and later standards
> introduce many other features, most of these are already available in
> gnu89 as GNU extensions as well.
The downside is that backporting affected patches to older kernel branches
now fails with error messages such as
mm/kfence/core.c: In function ‘kfence_init_pool’:
mm/kfence/core.c:595:2: error: ‘for’ loop initial declarations are only allowed in C99 or C11 mode
Just something to keep in mind when writing patches.
Guenter
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Guenter Roeck <linux@roeck-us.net>
To: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@kernel.org>
Cc: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
Michal Marek <michal.lkml@markovi.net>,
linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>,
Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>,
linux-staging@lists.linux.dev,
Masahiro Yamada <masahiroy@kernel.org>,
llvm@lists.linux.dev, Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@google.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org,
greybus-dev@lists.linaro.org, Alex Shi <alexs@kernel.org>,
Federico Vaga <federico.vaga@vaga.pv.it>,
Hu Haowen <src.res@email.cn>,
intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org, linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
linux-doc-tw-discuss@lists.sourceforge.net,
linux-kbuild@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] [v2] Kbuild: move to -std=gnu11
Date: Mon, 16 May 2022 06:10:23 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20220516131023.GA2329080@roeck-us.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20220228103142.3301082-1-arnd@kernel.org>
On Mon, Feb 28, 2022 at 11:27:43AM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
>
> During a patch discussion, Linus brought up the option of changing
> the C standard version from gnu89 to gnu99, which allows using variable
> declaration inside of a for() loop. While the C99, C11 and later standards
> introduce many other features, most of these are already available in
> gnu89 as GNU extensions as well.
The downside is that backporting affected patches to older kernel branches
now fails with error messages such as
mm/kfence/core.c: In function ‘kfence_init_pool’:
mm/kfence/core.c:595:2: error: ‘for’ loop initial declarations are only allowed in C99 or C11 mode
Just something to keep in mind when writing patches.
Guenter
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Guenter Roeck <linux@roeck-us.net>
To: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@kernel.org>
Cc: linux-kbuild@vger.kernel.org, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
Masahiro Yamada <masahiroy@kernel.org>,
llvm@lists.linux.dev, Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>,
Federico Vaga <federico.vaga@vaga.pv.it>,
Alex Shi <alexs@kernel.org>, Hu Haowen <src.res@email.cn>,
Michal Marek <michal.lkml@markovi.net>,
Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@google.com>,
linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-doc-tw-discuss@lists.sourceforge.net,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org, dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org,
greybus-dev@lists.linaro.org, linux-staging@lists.linux.dev,
linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] [v2] Kbuild: move to -std=gnu11
Date: Mon, 16 May 2022 06:10:23 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20220516131023.GA2329080@roeck-us.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20220228103142.3301082-1-arnd@kernel.org>
On Mon, Feb 28, 2022 at 11:27:43AM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
>
> During a patch discussion, Linus brought up the option of changing
> the C standard version from gnu89 to gnu99, which allows using variable
> declaration inside of a for() loop. While the C99, C11 and later standards
> introduce many other features, most of these are already available in
> gnu89 as GNU extensions as well.
The downside is that backporting affected patches to older kernel branches
now fails with error messages such as
mm/kfence/core.c: In function ‘kfence_init_pool’:
mm/kfence/core.c:595:2: error: ‘for’ loop initial declarations are only allowed in C99 or C11 mode
Just something to keep in mind when writing patches.
Guenter
_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-05-16 13:10 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 109+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-02-28 10:27 [PATCH] [v2] Kbuild: move to -std=gnu11 Arnd Bergmann
2022-02-28 10:27 ` [Intel-gfx] " Arnd Bergmann
2022-02-28 10:27 ` Arnd Bergmann
2022-02-28 10:27 ` Arnd Bergmann
2022-02-28 10:50 ` Greg KH
2022-02-28 10:50 ` Greg KH
2022-02-28 10:50 ` [Intel-gfx] " Greg KH
2022-02-28 10:50 ` Greg KH
2022-02-28 11:25 ` Mark Rutland
2022-02-28 11:25 ` [Intel-gfx] " Mark Rutland
2022-02-28 11:25 ` Mark Rutland
2022-02-28 11:25 ` Mark Rutland
2022-02-28 11:37 ` Arnd Bergmann
2022-02-28 11:37 ` [Intel-gfx] " Arnd Bergmann
2022-02-28 11:37 ` Arnd Bergmann
2022-02-28 11:37 ` Arnd Bergmann
2022-02-28 18:40 ` [Intel-gfx] " Linus Torvalds
2022-02-28 18:40 ` Linus Torvalds
2022-02-28 18:40 ` Linus Torvalds
2022-02-28 18:40 ` Linus Torvalds
2022-02-28 17:07 ` Masahiro Yamada
2022-02-28 17:07 ` [Intel-gfx] " Masahiro Yamada
2022-02-28 17:07 ` Masahiro Yamada
2022-02-28 17:07 ` Masahiro Yamada
2022-02-28 11:47 ` Marco Elver
2022-02-28 11:47 ` [Intel-gfx] " Marco Elver
2022-02-28 11:47 ` Marco Elver
2022-02-28 11:47 ` Marco Elver
2022-02-28 11:57 ` Arnd Bergmann
2022-02-28 11:57 ` [Intel-gfx] " Arnd Bergmann
2022-02-28 11:57 ` Arnd Bergmann
2022-02-28 11:57 ` Arnd Bergmann
2022-02-28 16:56 ` Nathan Chancellor
2022-02-28 16:56 ` [Intel-gfx] " Nathan Chancellor
2022-02-28 16:56 ` Nathan Chancellor
2022-02-28 16:56 ` Nathan Chancellor
2022-02-28 12:36 ` Jani Nikula
2022-02-28 12:36 ` Jani Nikula
2022-02-28 12:36 ` [Intel-gfx] " Jani Nikula
2022-02-28 12:36 ` Jani Nikula
2022-02-28 13:01 ` Arnd Bergmann
2022-02-28 13:01 ` [Intel-gfx] " Arnd Bergmann
2022-02-28 13:01 ` Arnd Bergmann
2022-02-28 13:01 ` Arnd Bergmann
2022-02-28 13:19 ` David Sterba
2022-02-28 13:19 ` David Sterba
2022-02-28 13:19 ` [Intel-gfx] " David Sterba
2022-02-28 13:19 ` David Sterba
2022-02-28 12:48 ` Alex Shi
2022-02-28 12:48 ` Alex Shi
2022-02-28 12:48 ` [Intel-gfx] " Alex Shi
2022-02-28 12:48 ` Alex Shi
2022-02-28 12:56 ` David Sterba
2022-02-28 12:56 ` David Sterba
2022-02-28 12:56 ` [Intel-gfx] " David Sterba
2022-02-28 12:56 ` David Sterba
2022-02-28 17:02 ` Masahiro Yamada
2022-02-28 17:02 ` [Intel-gfx] " Masahiro Yamada
2022-02-28 17:02 ` Masahiro Yamada
2022-02-28 17:02 ` Masahiro Yamada
2022-02-28 18:24 ` Arnd Bergmann
2022-02-28 18:24 ` [Intel-gfx] " Arnd Bergmann
2022-02-28 18:24 ` Arnd Bergmann
2022-02-28 18:24 ` Arnd Bergmann
2022-02-28 21:03 ` Nick Desaulniers
2022-02-28 21:03 ` Nick Desaulniers
2022-02-28 21:03 ` [Intel-gfx] " Nick Desaulniers
2022-02-28 21:03 ` Nick Desaulniers
2022-02-28 21:41 ` Fangrui Song
2022-02-28 21:41 ` [Intel-gfx] " Fangrui Song
2022-02-28 21:41 ` Fangrui Song
2022-02-28 21:41 ` Fangrui Song
2022-03-01 14:45 ` Arnd Bergmann
2022-03-01 14:45 ` [Intel-gfx] " Arnd Bergmann
2022-03-01 14:45 ` Arnd Bergmann
2022-03-01 14:45 ` Arnd Bergmann
2022-02-28 21:41 ` [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.SPARSE: warning for " Patchwork
2022-02-28 22:13 ` [Intel-gfx] ✓ Fi.CI.BAT: success " Patchwork
2022-03-01 7:30 ` [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.IGT: failure " Patchwork
2022-03-01 10:24 ` [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.CHECKPATCH: warning for Kbuild: move to -std=gnu11 (rev2) Patchwork
2022-03-01 10:43 ` [PATCH] [v2] Kbuild: move to -std=gnu11 Miguel Ojeda
2022-03-01 10:43 ` [Intel-gfx] " Miguel Ojeda
2022-03-01 10:43 ` Miguel Ojeda
2022-03-01 10:43 ` Miguel Ojeda
2022-03-01 14:44 ` Arnd Bergmann
2022-03-01 14:44 ` [Intel-gfx] " Arnd Bergmann
2022-03-01 14:44 ` Arnd Bergmann
2022-03-01 14:44 ` Arnd Bergmann
2022-03-01 10:59 ` [Intel-gfx] ✓ Fi.CI.BAT: success for Kbuild: move to -std=gnu11 (rev2) Patchwork
2022-03-01 17:22 ` [Intel-gfx] ✓ Fi.CI.IGT: " Patchwork
2022-05-16 13:10 ` Guenter Roeck [this message]
2022-05-16 13:10 ` [PATCH] [v2] Kbuild: move to -std=gnu11 Guenter Roeck
2022-05-16 13:10 ` [Intel-gfx] " Guenter Roeck
2022-05-16 13:10 ` Guenter Roeck
2022-05-16 13:31 ` [greybus-dev] " Greg KH
2022-05-16 13:31 ` Greg KH
2022-05-16 13:31 ` [Intel-gfx] " Greg KH
2022-05-16 13:31 ` Greg KH
2022-05-16 14:19 ` Guenter Roeck
2022-05-16 14:19 ` Guenter Roeck
2022-05-16 14:19 ` [Intel-gfx] " Guenter Roeck
2022-05-16 14:19 ` Guenter Roeck
2022-05-18 7:46 ` Arnd Bergmann
2022-05-18 7:46 ` Arnd Bergmann
2022-05-18 7:46 ` Arnd Bergmann
2022-05-18 14:07 ` Guenter Roeck
2022-05-18 14:07 ` Guenter Roeck
2022-05-18 14:07 ` [Intel-gfx] " Guenter Roeck
2022-05-18 14:07 ` Guenter Roeck
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=20220516131023.GA2329080@roeck-us.net \
--to=linux@roeck-us.net \
--cc=alexs@kernel.org \
--cc=arnd@arndb.de \
--cc=arnd@kernel.org \
--cc=corbet@lwn.net \
--cc=dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=federico.vaga@vaga.pv.it \
--cc=greybus-dev@lists.linaro.org \
--cc=intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-doc-tw-discuss@lists.sourceforge.net \
--cc=linux-doc@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kbuild@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-staging@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=llvm@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=masahiroy@kernel.org \
--cc=michal.lkml@markovi.net \
--cc=ndesaulniers@google.com \
--cc=src.res@email.cn \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.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 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.