From: "Jan Beulich" <jbeulich@novell.com>
To: <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>, <hollisb@us.ibm.com>
Cc: <akpm@linux-foundation.org>, <linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org>,
<kvm-ppc@vger.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
<linux-next@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: linux-next: tree build failure
Date: Tue, 29 Sep 2009 10:28:36 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4AC1E15502000078000516B5@vpn.id2.novell.com> (raw)
>>> Hollis Blanchard 09/29/09 2:00 AM >>>
>First, I think there is a real bug here, and the code should read like
>this (to match the comment):
> /* type has to be known at build time for optimization */
>- BUILD_BUG_ON(__builtin_constant_p(type));
>+ BUILD_BUG_ON(!__builtin_constant_p(type));
>
>However, I get the same build error *both* ways, i.e.
>__builtin_constant_p(type) evaluates to both 0 and 1? Either that, or
>the new BUILD_BUG_ON() macro isn't working...
No, at this point of the compilation process it's neither zero nor one,
it's simply considered non-constant by the compiler at that stage
(this builtin is used for optimization, not during parsing, and the
error gets generated when the body of the function gets parsed,
not when code gets generated from it).
Jan
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: "Jan Beulich" <jbeulich@novell.com>
To: sfr@canb.auug.org.au, hollisb@us.ibm.com
Cc: akpm@linux-foundation.org, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org,
kvm-ppc@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-next@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: linux-next: tree build failure
Date: Tue, 29 Sep 2009 10:28:36 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4AC1E15502000078000516B5@vpn.id2.novell.com> (raw)
>>> Hollis Blanchard 09/29/09 2:00 AM >>>
>First, I think there is a real bug here, and the code should read like
>this (to match the comment):
> /* type has to be known at build time for optimization */
>- BUILD_BUG_ON(__builtin_constant_p(type));
>+ BUILD_BUG_ON(!__builtin_constant_p(type));
>
>However, I get the same build error *both* ways, i.e.
>__builtin_constant_p(type) evaluates to both 0 and 1? Either that, or
>the new BUILD_BUG_ON() macro isn't working...
No, at this point of the compilation process it's neither zero nor one,
it's simply considered non-constant by the compiler at that stage
(this builtin is used for optimization, not during parsing, and the
error gets generated when the body of the function gets parsed,
not when code gets generated from it).
Jan
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: "Jan Beulich" <jbeulich@novell.com>
To: <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>,<hollisb@us.ibm.com>
Cc: akpm@linux-foundation.org, linux-next@vger.kernel.org,
linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
kvm-ppc@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: linux-next: tree build failure
Date: Tue, 29 Sep 2009 10:28:36 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4AC1E15502000078000516B5@vpn.id2.novell.com> (raw)
>>> Hollis Blanchard 09/29/09 2:00 AM >>>
>First, I think there is a real bug here, and the code should read like
>this (to match the comment):
> /* type has to be known at build time for optimization */
>- BUILD_BUG_ON(__builtin_constant_p(type));
>+ BUILD_BUG_ON(!__builtin_constant_p(type));
>
>However, I get the same build error *both* ways, i.e.
>__builtin_constant_p(type) evaluates to both 0 and 1? Either that, or
>the new BUILD_BUG_ON() macro isn't working...
No, at this point of the compilation process it's neither zero nor one,
it's simply considered non-constant by the compiler at that stage
(this builtin is used for optimization, not during parsing, and the
error gets generated when the body of the function gets parsed,
not when code gets generated from it).
Jan
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: "Jan Beulich" <jbeulich@novell.com>
To: sfr@canb.auug.org.au, hollisb@us.ibm.com
Cc: akpm@linux-foundation.org, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org,
kvm-ppc@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-next@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: linux-next: tree build failure
Date: Tue, 29 Sep 2009 09:28:36 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4AC1E15502000078000516B5@vpn.id2.novell.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20090924152102.8d7d40cf.sfr@canb.auug.org.au>
>>> Hollis Blanchard 09/29/09 2:00 AM >>>
>First, I think there is a real bug here, and the code should read like
>this (to match the comment):
> /* type has to be known at build time for optimization */
>- BUILD_BUG_ON(__builtin_constant_p(type));
>+ BUILD_BUG_ON(!__builtin_constant_p(type));
>
>However, I get the same build error *both* ways, i.e.
>__builtin_constant_p(type) evaluates to both 0 and 1? Either that, or
>the new BUILD_BUG_ON() macro isn't working...
No, at this point of the compilation process it's neither zero nor one,
it's simply considered non-constant by the compiler at that stage
(this builtin is used for optimization, not during parsing, and the
error gets generated when the body of the function gets parsed,
not when code gets generated from it).
Jan
next reply other threads:[~2009-09-29 9:28 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 135+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-09-29 9:28 Jan Beulich [this message]
2009-09-29 9:28 ` linux-next: tree build failure Jan Beulich
2009-09-29 9:28 ` Jan Beulich
2009-09-29 9:28 ` Jan Beulich
2009-09-29 9:51 ` roel kluin
2009-09-29 9:51 ` roel kluin
2009-09-29 9:51 ` roel kluin
2009-09-29 9:51 ` roel kluin
2009-09-30 6:29 ` Jan Beulich
2009-09-30 6:29 ` Jan Beulich
2009-09-30 6:29 ` Jan Beulich
2009-09-30 6:29 ` Jan Beulich
2009-09-29 23:39 ` Hollis Blanchard
2009-09-29 23:39 ` Hollis Blanchard
2009-09-29 23:39 ` Hollis Blanchard
2009-09-29 23:39 ` Hollis Blanchard
2009-09-30 6:35 ` Jan Beulich
2009-09-30 6:35 ` Jan Beulich
2009-09-30 6:35 ` Jan Beulich
2009-09-30 6:35 ` Jan Beulich
2009-10-02 15:48 ` Hollis Blanchard
2009-10-02 15:48 ` Hollis Blanchard
2009-10-02 15:48 ` Hollis Blanchard
2009-10-02 15:48 ` Hollis Blanchard
2009-10-05 6:58 ` Jan Beulich
2009-10-05 6:58 ` Jan Beulich
2009-10-05 6:58 ` Jan Beulich
2009-10-05 6:58 ` Jan Beulich
2009-10-09 19:14 ` Hollis Blanchard
2009-10-09 19:14 ` Hollis Blanchard
2009-10-09 19:14 ` Hollis Blanchard
2009-10-14 22:57 ` Hollis Blanchard
2009-10-14 22:57 ` Hollis Blanchard
2009-10-14 22:57 ` Hollis Blanchard
2009-10-15 7:27 ` Jan Beulich
2009-10-15 7:27 ` Jan Beulich
2009-10-15 7:27 ` Jan Beulich
2009-10-15 7:27 ` Jan Beulich
2009-10-19 18:19 ` Hollis Blanchard
2009-10-19 18:19 ` Hollis Blanchard
2009-10-19 18:19 ` Hollis Blanchard
2009-10-20 1:12 ` Rusty Russell
2009-10-20 1:24 ` Rusty Russell
2009-10-20 1:12 ` Rusty Russell
2009-10-20 1:29 ` Hollis Blanchard
2009-10-20 1:29 ` Hollis Blanchard
2009-10-20 1:29 ` Hollis Blanchard
2009-10-20 1:29 ` Hollis Blanchard
2009-10-20 3:45 ` [PATCH] BUILD_BUG_ON: make it handle more cases Rusty Russell
2009-10-20 3:57 ` Rusty Russell
2009-10-20 3:45 ` Rusty Russell
2009-10-20 3:45 ` Rusty Russell
2009-10-20 13:58 ` Américo Wang
2009-10-20 13:58 ` Américo Wang
2009-10-20 13:58 ` Américo Wang
2009-10-20 14:43 ` Alan Jenkins
2009-10-20 14:43 ` Alan Jenkins
2009-10-20 14:43 ` Alan Jenkins
2009-10-23 1:50 ` Américo Wang
2009-10-23 1:50 ` Américo Wang
2009-10-23 1:50 ` Américo Wang
2009-10-23 1:50 ` Américo Wang
2009-10-22 21:04 ` Hollis Blanchard
2009-10-22 21:04 ` Hollis Blanchard
2009-10-22 21:04 ` Hollis Blanchard
2009-10-22 21:04 ` Hollis Blanchard
2009-10-29 21:30 ` Hollis Blanchard
2009-10-29 21:30 ` Hollis Blanchard
2009-10-29 21:30 ` Hollis Blanchard
2009-11-05 0:20 ` Stephen Rothwell
2009-11-05 0:20 ` Stephen Rothwell
2009-11-05 0:20 ` Stephen Rothwell
2009-11-05 0:20 ` Stephen Rothwell
2009-11-05 6:28 ` Rusty Russell
2009-11-05 6:40 ` Rusty Russell
2009-11-05 6:28 ` Rusty Russell
2009-11-05 6:37 ` Rusty Russell
2009-11-05 6:49 ` Rusty Russell
2009-11-05 6:37 ` Rusty Russell
2009-11-05 6:37 ` Rusty Russell
2009-11-05 6:38 ` Stephen Rothwell
2009-11-05 6:38 ` Stephen Rothwell
2009-11-05 6:38 ` Stephen Rothwell
2009-11-06 6:30 ` Rusty Russell
2009-11-06 6:42 ` Rusty Russell
2009-11-06 6:30 ` Rusty Russell
2009-11-06 6:30 ` Rusty Russell
2009-11-05 6:01 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2009-11-05 6:01 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2009-11-05 6:01 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2009-12-16 7:21 linux-next: tree build failure Stephen Rothwell
2009-12-16 9:02 ` Felipe Balbi
2009-12-16 10:10 ` Liam Girdwood
2009-12-16 10:10 ` Liam Girdwood
2009-10-01 3:19 Stephen Rothwell
2009-10-01 7:58 ` Jens Axboe
2009-10-01 10:41 ` Stephen Rothwell
2009-09-24 5:21 Stephen Rothwell
2009-09-24 5:21 ` Stephen Rothwell
2009-09-24 5:21 ` Stephen Rothwell
2009-09-29 0:00 ` Hollis Blanchard
2009-09-29 0:00 ` Hollis Blanchard
2009-09-29 0:00 ` Hollis Blanchard
2009-09-29 0:00 ` Hollis Blanchard
2009-08-17 8:39 Stephen Rothwell
2009-08-03 0:35 Stephen Rothwell
2009-08-03 1:01 ` NeilBrown
2009-08-03 1:30 ` Stephen Rothwell
2009-07-27 7:53 Stephen Rothwell
2009-07-27 9:21 ` Karsten Keil
2009-07-27 15:06 ` David Miller
2009-07-28 4:22 ` Stephen Rothwell
2009-04-07 3:41 Stephen Rothwell
2009-04-07 10:00 ` Mark Brown
2009-04-08 1:48 ` Takashi Iwai
2009-03-23 9:38 Stephen Rothwell
2009-03-23 22:27 ` Mauro Carvalho Chehab
2009-03-23 23:25 ` Stephen Rothwell
2009-03-05 7:41 Stephen Rothwell
2009-03-06 5:01 ` Rusty Russell
2009-01-16 5:37 Stephen Rothwell
2009-01-16 7:25 ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-01-16 9:03 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-01-16 10:39 ` Stephen Rothwell
2009-01-16 10:53 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-01-16 11:53 ` Stephen Rothwell
2009-01-16 12:32 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-11-28 10:04 Stephen Rothwell
2008-11-28 10:25 ` Takashi Iwai
2008-11-28 10:43 ` Stephen Rothwell
2008-11-28 17:23 ` Takashi Iwai
2008-10-21 8:30 Stephen Rothwell
2008-08-25 10:33 Stephen Rothwell
2008-08-25 16:36 ` Steven Rostedt
2008-06-30 14:35 Stephen Rothwell
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=4AC1E15502000078000516B5@vpn.id2.novell.com \
--to=jbeulich@novell.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=hollisb@us.ibm.com \
--cc=kvm-ppc@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-next@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
--cc=sfr@canb.auug.org.au \
/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.