Re: any value to "NORET_TYPE" macro?

[Satyam Sharma]

On 5/23/07, Krzysztof Halasa <khc@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> "Robert P. J. Day" <rpjday@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
>
> > 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.
>
> No guessing, I just checked it (though a second check wouldn't do
> any harm).
>
> > the simple version of the patch is now in andrew's tree, and i'll
> > worry about the harder stuff next time.
>
> The "next time" would be much harder as there would be no key for
> searching for these functions.

Krzysztof's absolutely right ... we don't want to lose the NORET_TYPE
annotations on all these functions before we switch them to
ATTRIB_NORET. And yes, _all_ of these NORET_TYPE's do want
to be ATTRIB_NORET (except for those that are double-annotated,
for those we can just get rid of the NORET_TYPE macro).
-
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/