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=-6.0 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIMWL_WL_HIGH, DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,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 95DF4C433E6 for ; Mon, 11 Jan 2021 13:39:13 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 73A9D225AC for ; Mon, 11 Jan 2021 13:39:13 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1731614AbhAKNjF (ORCPT ); Mon, 11 Jan 2021 08:39:05 -0500 Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com ([63.128.21.124]:51897 "EHLO us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1731690AbhAKNiy (ORCPT ); Mon, 11 Jan 2021 08:38:54 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1610372248; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=z9Ytc0z65ta6VBHkGYAtmWB3CyrCaTNiz9kZPtd9Uis=; b=VuWBMiXuaXHH/UzujDs85/x51SZwBDiqfv2HkEXgkWqiYCnc6MlSVm28+DCjBATQRkpexo 1BqouaJjBmQdmLeyuu+QXdYPTg6A1hLekVFHmCIfpgeMRl/Pna0Hy1pQIA+DICLRTWsASj eCtq9BslSeKxy886muOxZ2GifaJZWzU= Received: from mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (mimecast-mx01.redhat.com [209.132.183.4]) (Using TLS) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP id us-mta-528-2Qg1gw1kP32avUrGJwu4QQ-1; Mon, 11 Jan 2021 08:37:24 -0500 X-MC-Unique: 2Qg1gw1kP32avUrGJwu4QQ-1 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx01.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.11]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7A2B4835B68; Mon, 11 Jan 2021 13:37:22 +0000 (UTC) Received: from treble (ovpn-120-156.rdu2.redhat.com [10.10.120.156]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 81BED50C0D; Mon, 11 Jan 2021 13:37:21 +0000 (UTC) Date: Mon, 11 Jan 2021 07:37:19 -0600 From: Josh Poimboeuf To: Valdis =?utf-8?Q?Kl=C4=93tnieks?= Cc: Geert Uytterhoeven , Kees Cook , linux-hardening@vger.kernel.org, Linux Kernel Mailing List Subject: Re: [PATCH] gcc-plugins: fix gcc 11 indigestion with plugins... Message-ID: <20210111133719.w53ad4xnw5yyi2lf@treble> References: <82487.1609006918@turing-police> <160997457204.3687425.15622431721220616573.b4-ty@chromium.org> <122278.1610362619@turing-police> <128149.1610368277@turing-police> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <128149.1610368277@turing-police> X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.79 on 10.5.11.11 Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Jan 11, 2021 at 07:31:17AM -0500, Valdis Klētnieks wrote: > On Mon, 11 Jan 2021 05:56:59 -0500, I said: > > > > It's probably related. I'm just having a hard time understanding why 4.9 and 5.4 > > > whine about the lack of a space, while 8.3 and 11 didn't complain... > > So after more digging, at least some clarity has surfaced. > > It looks like it's not a kernel source tree issue, it's a g++ issue fixed in g++ 6 and later. > > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69959 > > And it looks like there was an intent to backport it to 4.9 and 5.4: > https://gcc.gnu.org/legacy-ml/gcc-patches/2016-02/msg01409.html > > The bugtracker doesn't show an equivalent for 69959 being closed against 4.9.x or 5.[56], > > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63254 has a patch for one of the > gcc-supplied files that tosses the warning, but that way lies madness... > > Not sure what we want to do here - the main alternatives I see are: > > Tell people still using 4.9/5.4 to either live with the warning or upgrade to 6 or later > > Make the flag a variable and pass either -std=gnu++98 or -std=gnu++11 > depending on the output of 'g++ --version' > > What say the peanut gallery? I think putting the flag in a variable (based on call cc-ifversion) should be easy enough, then we can put this little saga behind us and pretend it never happened :-) -- Josh