Re: [PATCH] clk, ti, LLVMLinux: Move __init outside of type definition

[Felipe Balbi]

On Fri, Sep 26, 2014 at 05:31:48PM -0700, Behan Webster wrote:
> As written, the __init for ti_clk_get_div_table is in the middle of the return
> type.
> 
> The gcc documentation indicates that section attributes should be added to the
> end of the function declaration:
> 
>   extern void foobar (void) __attribute__ ((section ("bar")));
> 
> However gcc seems to be very permissive with where attributes can be placed.
> clang on the other hand isn't so permissive, and fails if you put the section
> definition in the middle of the return type:
> 
> drivers/clk/ti/divider.c:298:28: error: expected ';' after struct
> static struct clk_div_table
>                            ^
>                            ;
> drivers/clk/ti/divider.c:298:1: warning: 'static' ignored on this
>       declaration [-Wmissing-declarations]
> static struct clk_div_table
> ^
> drivers/clk/ti/divider.c:299:9: error: type specifier missing,
>       defaults to 'int' [-Werror,-Wimplicit-int]
> __init *ti_clk_get_div_table(struct device_node *node)
> ~~~~~~  ^
> drivers/clk/ti/divider.c:345:9: warning: incompatible pointer types
>       returning 'struct clk_div_table *' from a function with result type 'int *' [-Wincompatible-pointer-types]
>         return table;
>                ^~~~~
> drivers/clk/ti/divider.c:419:9: warning: incompatible pointer types
>       assigning to 'const struct clk_div_table *' from 'int *' [-Wincompatible-pointer-types]
>         *table = ti_clk_get_div_table(node);
>                ^ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> 3 warnings and 2 errors generated.
> 
> By convention, most of the kernel code puts section attributes between the
> return type and function name. In the case where the return type is a pointer,
> it's important to place the '*' on left of the __init.
> 
> This updated code works for both gcc and clang.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Behan Webster <behanw@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Reviewed-by: Mark Charlebois <charlebm@xxxxxxxxx>

makes sense to me:

Reviewed-by: Felipe Balbi <balbi@xxxxxx>

I wonder if we should add this a Sparse or Coccinelle rule.

-- 
balbi

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature