From: David Mosberger <davidm@napali.hpl.hp.com>
To: Stephen Hemminger <shemminger@osdl.org>
Cc: David Mosberger-Tang <davidm@hpl.hp.com>,
linux-ia64@linuxia64.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: GCC nested functions?
Date: Wed, 12 May 2004 11:13:50 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <16546.26974.678560.553686@napali.hpl.hp.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20040512105924.54a8211b@dell_ss3.pdx.osdl.net>
>>>>> On Wed, 12 May 2004 10:59:24 -0700, Stephen Hemminger <shemminger@osdl.org> said:
Stephen> I used GCC nested functions in the (not released) bridge
Stephen> sysfs interface for 2.6.6. It seemed like a nice way to
Stephen> express the sysfs related interface without doing lots of
Stephen> code copying (or worse lots of macros).
Oh, man! Nested C functions are evil. Just don't do it.
Stephen> This works fine for GCC 2.95 and 3.X for i386 and x86_64
Stephen> architectures, but the ia64 (cross compiler) pukes with:
Stephen> In function `store_forward_delay':
Stephen> : undefined reference to `__ia64_trampoline'
Stephen> Redoing it as separate functions is easy enough, but the
Stephen> questions are:
Stephen> - Are gcc nested functions allowed in the kernel? If not
Stephen> where should this restriction be put in Documentation?
Stephen> CodingStyles?
Nested C functions shouldn't be allowed _anywhere_. It's the worst
extension that has made it into GNU C.
Stephen> - Or is gcc on ia64 just too stupid? or do some more
Stephen> support routines need to exist in arch/ia64?
It has nothing to do with stupidity. The kernel doesn't support all
the routines provided by libgcc.a. __ia64_trampoline() is one of
them.
Stephen> - Do other architectures (sparc, ppc) have similar problems?
It's not a problem. It's a feature. It's likely that other
architectures which require a helper-routine from libgcc would behave
the same.
--david
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2004-05-12 18:13 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2004-05-12 17:59 Stephen Hemminger
2004-05-12 18:04 ` Christoph Hellwig
2004-05-13 0:07 ` Mitchell Blank Jr
2004-05-12 18:11 ` William Lee Irwin III
2004-05-12 18:13 ` David Mosberger [this message]
2004-05-12 19:30 ` viro
2004-05-12 19:34 ` Gabriel Paubert
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=16546.26974.678560.553686@napali.hpl.hp.com \
--to=davidm@napali.hpl.hp.com \
--cc=davidm@hpl.hp.com \
--cc=linux-ia64@linuxia64.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=shemminger@osdl.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®