Re: [PATCH][RFC] getting rid of stupid loop in BUG()

[H. Peter Anvin]

Al Viro wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 24, 2007 at 09:56:21AM -0700, Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote:
>> Al Viro wrote:
>>> 	AFAICS, the patch below should do it for i386; instead of
>>> using a dummy loop to tell gcc that this sucker never returns,
>>> we do
>>> static void __always_inline __noreturn __BUG(const char *file, int line);
>>> containing the actual asm we want to insert and define BUG() as
>>> __BUG(__FILE__, __LINE__).  It looks safe, but I don't claim enough
>>> experience with gcc __asm__ potential nastiness, so...
>>>
>>> Comments, objections?
>>>   
>> Does it work?  When I wrote the BUG code I tried this, but gcc kept
>> warning about "noreturn function returns".  I couldn't work out a way to
>> convince gcc that the asm is the end of the line.
> 
> Works here...

Could it be a gcc version difference?

	-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/