From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To: Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@csgroup.eu>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>, He Ying <heying24@huawei.com>,
frederic@kernel.org, paulmck@kernel.org, clg@kaod.org,
qais.yousef@arm.com, johnny.chenyi@huawei.com,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] smp: kernel/panic.c - silence warnings
Date: Wed, 17 Mar 2021 18:37:36 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <YFI+YMo7zml+spKc@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <fa3f9880-eb05-f18e-ae7f-4735209f4c94@csgroup.eu>
On Wed, Mar 17, 2021 at 06:17:26PM +0100, Christophe Leroy wrote:
>
>
> Le 17/03/2021 à 13:23, Peter Zijlstra a écrit :
> > On Wed, Mar 17, 2021 at 12:00:29PM +0100, Christophe Leroy wrote:
> > > What do you mean ? 'extern' prototype is pointless for function prototypes
> > > and deprecated, no new function prototypes should be added with the 'extern'
> > > keyword.
> > >
> > > checkpatch.pl tells you: "extern prototypes should be avoided in .h files"
> >
> > I have a very strong preference for extern on function decls, to match
> > the extern on variable decl.
>
> You mean you also do 'static inline' variable declarations ?
That's a func definition, not a declaration. And you _can_ do static
variable definitions in a header file just fine, although that's
typically not what you'd want. Although sometimes I've seen people do:
static const int my_var = 10;
inline is an attribute that obviously doesn't work on variables.
> Using the extern keyword on function prototypes is superfluous visual
> noise so suggest removing it.
I don't agree; and I think the C spec is actually wrong there (too).
The thing is that it distinguishes between a forward declaration of a
function in the same TU and an external declaration for a function in
another TU.
That is; if I see:
void ponies(int legs);
I expect that function to be defined later in the same TU. IOW it's a
forward declaration. OTOH if I see:
extern void ponies(int legs);
I know I won't find it in this TU and the linker will end up involved.
Now, the C people figured that distinction was useless and allowed
sloppiness. But I still think there's merrit to that. And as mentioned
earlier, it is consistent with variable declarations.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-03-17 17:38 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-03-16 8:41 He Ying
2021-03-17 9:49 ` Ingo Molnar
2021-03-17 11:00 ` Christophe Leroy
2021-03-17 12:23 ` Peter Zijlstra
2021-03-17 17:17 ` Christophe Leroy
2021-03-17 17:37 ` Peter Zijlstra [this message]
2021-03-17 20:09 ` Ingo Molnar
2021-03-18 2:56 ` heying (H)
2021-03-18 6:11 ` Christophe Leroy
2021-03-18 6:04 ` Christophe Leroy
2021-03-18 5:53 ` Christophe Leroy
2021-03-19 1:39 ` heying (H)
2021-03-19 6:58 ` Christophe Leroy
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=YFI+YMo7zml+spKc@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net \
--to=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=christophe.leroy@csgroup.eu \
--cc=clg@kaod.org \
--cc=frederic@kernel.org \
--cc=heying24@huawei.com \
--cc=johnny.chenyi@huawei.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=paulmck@kernel.org \
--cc=qais.yousef@arm.com \
/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
Powered by JetHome