Re: any value to "NORET_TYPE" macro?

[Robert P. J. Day]

On Tue, 22 May 2007, Krzysztof Halasa wrote:

> Adrian Bunk <bunk@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
>
> >> no, i think you're thinking of the alternative ATTRIB_NORET macro.
> >> as you can read in my previous post, NORET_TYPE used to resolve to
> >> "__volatile__" for very old gcc.  so i think it's legitimately dead
> >> and can be ripped out.
> >
> > No doubt that it could be removed because it doesn't have any effect.
> >
> > But locking at the usages, it seems to have been used when people
> > thought it was what __noreturn now is, so replacing NORET_TYPE with
> > __noreturn might be a small optimization (but every NORET_TYPE should
> > be checked that it's actually correct).
>
> Actually it seems all the NORET_TYPEs are in fact (should be)
> __attribute__((noreturn)) (2.6.21):

that may be but, as i suggested earlier, that would get into guessing
what those developers were thinking, and i just didn't want to go
there.

the simple version of the patch is now in andrew's tree, and i'll
worry about the harder stuff next time.

rday
-- 
========================================================================
Robert P. J. Day
Linux Consulting, Training and Annoying Kernel Pedantry
Waterloo, Ontario, CANADA

http://fsdev.net/wiki/index.php?title=Main_Page
========================================================================
-
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/