linux-next: tree build failure
Jan Beulich
JBeulich at novell.com
Mon Oct 5 17:58:25 EST 2009
>>> Hollis Blanchard <hollisb at us.ibm.com> 02.10.09 17:48 >>>
>On Wed, 2009-09-30 at 07:35 +0100, Jan Beulich wrote:
>> The one Rusty suggested the other day may help here. I don't like it
>> as a drop-in replacement for BUILD_BUG_ON() though (due to it
>> deferring the error generated to the linking stage), I'd rather view
>> this as an improvement to MAYBE_BUILD_BUG_ON() (which should
>> then be used here).
>
>Can you be more specific?
>
>I have no idea what Rusty suggested where. I can't even guess what
I'm attaching Rusty's response I was referring to.
>MAYBE_BUILD_BUG_ON() is supposed to do (sounds like a terrible name).
Agreed - but presumably better than just deleting the bogus instances
altogether...
Jan
-------------- next part --------------
An embedded message was scrubbed...
From: Rusty Russell <rusty at rustcorp.com.au>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] fix BUILD_BUG_ON() and a couple of bogus uses of it
Date: Wed, 23 Sep 2009 10:27:00 +0930
Size: 2615
URL: <http://lists.ozlabs.org/pipermail/linuxppc-dev/attachments/20091005/6ee64e7e/attachment.eml>
More information about the Linuxppc-dev
mailing list