From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.7 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CEDE7C433DF for ; Fri, 10 Jul 2020 10:09:56 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B12412077D for ; Fri, 10 Jul 2020 10:09:56 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726615AbgGJKJ4 (ORCPT ); Fri, 10 Jul 2020 06:09:56 -0400 Received: from mout.kundenserver.de ([212.227.126.133]:43081 "EHLO mout.kundenserver.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726496AbgGJKJ4 (ORCPT ); Fri, 10 Jul 2020 06:09:56 -0400 Received: from mail-qv1-f45.google.com ([209.85.219.45]) by mrelayeu.kundenserver.de (mreue010 [212.227.15.129]) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 1MhDIw-1kY6TI29AI-00eK63; Fri, 10 Jul 2020 12:09:54 +0200 Received: by mail-qv1-f45.google.com with SMTP id di5so2276762qvb.11; Fri, 10 Jul 2020 03:09:54 -0700 (PDT) X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532n3buQmTopmzjvj8DqP8b/9LM2Kgf0Yj3mynra1mbzcg1/8wQl kkHX1qyVGxXv3O5z2d1kxBj+IPGA/z1nmkyMAOs= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJz42eCmUaIZXAhF7p+bGv6J/eqTfJpUn8i64n/JP6ZF/QkNEGTvnQH4lELo6dycg+GyJ7Mr3FpMhnbMFtHAw/8= X-Received: by 2002:ad4:4c09:: with SMTP id bz9mr32958807qvb.210.1594375793273; Fri, 10 Jul 2020 03:09:53 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20200628182601.GA84577@gmail.com> <20200708162053.GU4800@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net> <20200709103459.wenqhbp52vesr7e5@box> In-Reply-To: <20200709103459.wenqhbp52vesr7e5@box> From: Arnd Bergmann Date: Fri, 10 Jul 2020 12:09:36 +0200 X-Gmail-Original-Message-ID: Message-ID: Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] EFI fixes To: "Kirill A. Shutemov" Cc: Linus Torvalds , Peter Zijlstra , Ingo Molnar , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Ard Biesheuvel , Thomas Gleixner , Borislav Petkov , linux-efi Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Provags-ID: V03:K1:gvF83ApGf8hKP2O1vP8zoFIwS44aCFiOT/QsD3dUR7syB2ayIEp ZP7Wx3P2FeTmrlclGt64f46/6xp5Clr177EqCilknKtnxltjpM2k31rnCycFXG8iCDQg8l3 JAvGf8OuyBN2mGKhLpMDcurprWw9i0tQGcgPL+TUjK5CS62ODAefH9HrniLt5aowQ1mGspF nGW79wKW1tkDiSFAiMnoQ== X-UI-Out-Filterresults: notjunk:1;V03:K0:eBjNb/liNXQ=:qxrWFd//CZF+Zppew6fUEQ dVYZdZJQuaaVtD1lxgukJTxZEXte6aYuaCUKlEXImGBWeSg2r36c1iu2M/4P5U62mojTMXV4s MzLB74s/Dfhg6VagcRsKi8qNllt3pT/ikgrutvjatVjUFrpB72PzelAuYl0aSI04i2l/zOcnD hKttWm9NPuCaEqtuC758tfbYuv57/dVNylaab5OPLBf5VCUfH0n1QZA3hnS57CQHLaURjrcb+ +FzTKBUnCrTUAwSQmFj3286SNgt2fyBSJvs/dm5opLhzuHTG0AC8Eeh2Wvr+9LZ/E3kCx8hJM MX5P5HZZd0YFj6aRUsJcFpNfFJamq5UfVNfaxpqoLGU8poM7yUbFMM9ECy3Ca9y9T5XXFBJ/u 7/f9bO5fVY2F3+DTgr/vdJGIyrw3/+lVUu7lM0/dyURm+Nyq6Oi9qcrt7p26OHEF1QnPz+XGU YIn05ktBsK5JqDFb410SFQPxt3RwEsMrjdsOMCnysw4KCO35T2wSQKL/6Ja5BnEwuzwZVhOhg prQ1YlYw+YpyrSEnMDT9A7OKPDmqYG9dBQpKcezIp9F8odsGcvm6dIBYazLKHNzpoboB9+tuX RT5CcngsInSOM1QUAQEVIUpMlifrPUALnx+6kmLpyBm0n19jwQyyDV85VpoPeYL+bw50+EDZ2 yQ1QEckn8UAlhL/V/T+aqeVhEzwx+fPOmcpefALHJMYL/J7VguhSqhnkwRKEFeRxfuY2ubIvT xjDJTeAW/+Y4NtAWmE/j2k7SaURwnVKEAdg6TvgFBxSstNS/kiahQh9r0+bnL8SkzwdJXEdwB NDxRKaZjkFNEniF97LNKAcaqQmt8wl1SlrmnvHBn1pBg5qvCAD+yOAbqGd2m/Tfx/NR6A5A Sender: linux-efi-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-efi@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Jul 9, 2020 at 12:35 PM Kirill A. Shutemov wrote: > > On Thu, Jul 09, 2020 at 11:30:27AM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > > The most interesting version to require in the future would be > > gcc-7, which IIRC is the point at which we can just use -std=gnu99 > > or -std=gnu11 instead of -std=gnu89 without running into the > > problem with compound literals[1]. > > It is gcc-5, not gcc-7. This commit: > > https://gcc.gnu.org/git/?p=gcc.git;a=commit;h=d303aeafa9b4 Ok, glad I was wrong here. I confirmed that with gcc-5 or higher I can build a kernel with -std=gnu11 or -std=gnu99 instead of -std=gnu89, but gcc-4.9.4 fails with anything other than gnu89. I forgot why we care though -- is there any behavior of gnu11 that we prefer over the gnu99 behavior, or is it just going with the times because it's the right thing to do? All the interesting features of c11 seem to also be available as extensions in gcc-4.9's gnu89, though I could not find a definite list of the differences. Arnd