From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S1753171AbcE2THP (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Sun, 29 May 2016 15:07:15 -0400
Received: from science.sciencehorizons.net ([71.41.210.147]:19406 "HELO
	ns.sciencehorizons.net" rhost-flags-OK-FAIL-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
	with SMTP id S1752924AbcE2THN (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Sun, 29 May 2016 15:07:13 -0400
Date: 29 May 2016 15:07:12 -0400
Message-ID: <20160529190712.14364.qmail@ns.sciencehorizons.net>
From: "George Spelvin" <linux@sciencehorizons.net>
To: geert@linux-m68k.org, linux@sciencehorizons.net,
        torvalds@linux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] test/hash: Fix warning in preprocessor symbol evaluation
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
In-Reply-To: <20160529185355.12968.qmail@ns.sciencehorizons.net>
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

> But here's an alternative.  Geert, what do you think of this?

Never mind; that doesn't work.  Plain gcc-4.9 passes, it, but it's the
"-Wundef" flag that the kernel uses that triggers it.

So we're back to Geert's original suggestion.
Acked-by: George Spelvin <linux@sciencehorizons.net>

==>$ cat foo.c
#ifndef FOO
This is a test.
#elif FOO == 1
This is another test
#elif FOO + 0 == 1
who knows
#endif

==>$ gcc-6 -W -Wall -Wundef -E foo.c
# 1 "foo.c"
# 1 "<built-in>"
# 1 "<command-line>"
# 31 "<command-line>"
# 1 "/usr/include/stdc-predef.h" 1 3 4
# 32 "<command-line>" 2
# 1 "foo.c"

This is a test.

==>$ gcc-4.9 -W -Wall -Wundef -E foo.c
# 1 "foo.c"
# 1 "<built-in>"
# 1 "<command-line>"
# 1 "/usr/include/stdc-predef.h" 1 3 4
# 1 "<command-line>" 2
# 1 "foo.c"

foo.c:3:7: warning: "FOO" is not defined [-Wundef]
 #elif FOO == 1
       ^
foo.c:5:7: warning: "FOO" is not defined [-Wundef]
 #elif FOO + 0 == 1
       ^
This is a test.