Re: [PATCH] m32r: set CHECKFLAGS properly

[Al Viro]

On Tue, Sep 27, 2005 at 01:31:25PM -0400, Kyle Moffett wrote:
> >    3) way, way, *WAY* too much spew.  gcc pre-defines shitloads of  
> >stuff and some of that stuff very definitely should not be there  
> >for sparse.
> 
> Why not?  Some of that stuff may get used in kernel headers, which  
> sparse should definitely have defined.  Besides, sparse is designed  
> to check C source code, which will be compiled with said GCC using  
> those preprocessing defines.  Why should it use a different set of  
> defines?

First of all, some of that stuff should not be used in kernel headers
and getting a warning about such uses is a Good Thing(tm).  What's
more, some are actively *wrong* for kernel - __STDC_HOSTED__, for one,
is simply a lie.  And no, sparse (or any other C compiler) is not
required to have the same pile as gcc does.

There's another reason why limited subset is good - it documents the
subset we are using.  And having to reach gcc source just to figure
out which architectures might have given symbol...  No, thanks.
-
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/