Re: any value to "NORET_TYPE" macro?

[Robert P. J. Day]

On Wed, 23 May 2007, Satyam Sharma wrote:

> 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).

ok, i'll go back and take another look at this.

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/