Re: [PATCH] new ioctl type checking causes gcc warning

[Jamie Lokier]

Kevin P. Fleming wrote:
> >I had tried that first, but found that there are places that
> >use asm/ioctl.h without including asm/posix_types.h first, so 
> >size_t might not be declared. unsigned int (or unsigned long)
> >is the better alternative here. Does this look ok to everyone?
> 
> After working on this some more this afternoon, I realize now that 
> it's much better to have the typechecking in place than not, even for 
> userspace. Maybe the best solution is to still leave the typechecking 
> (don't wrap it in #ifdef __KERNEL__), and just
> 
> #ifdef size_t
> extern size_t __invalid_size_argument_for_IOC;
> #else
> extern unsigned int __invalid_size_argument_for_IOC;
> #endif

What's wrong with __typeof__(sizeof(0))?

-- Jamie
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/