Re: [3/8] kill gen_init_cpio.c printk() of size_t warning

[H. Peter Anvin]

William Lee Irwin III wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 03, 2005 at 09:09:48PM +0000, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
>
> > Dear Wrongbot,
> > Bullshit.  Signed is promoted to unsigned.
>
> I'm not sure who you're responding to here, but gcc emitted an actual
> warning and I was only attempting to carry out the minimal effort
> necessary to silence it. I'm not really interested in creating or
> being involved with controversy, just silencing the core build in the
> least invasive and so on way possible, leaving deeper drivers/ issues
> to the resolution of the true underlying problems.
>
> I don't have anything to do with the code excerpt above; I merely
> followed the style of the other unsigned integer coercions in the file.

I was not responding to you, your stuff is perfectly sane.

The claim from the Wrongbot was that "foo + 1" is bad when foo is a 
size_t.  This is utter bullshit, since that's EXACTLY equivalent to:

	foo + (size_t)1

... because of promotion rules.

	-hpa
-
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/