linux-mips
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [PATCH] [RFC] Proposed changes to eliminate 'union mips_instruction'

To: David Daney <ddaney.cavm@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] [RFC] Proposed changes to eliminate 'union mips_instruction' type.
From: Ralf Baechle <ralf@linux-mips.org>
Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2013 15:05:10 +0100
Cc: "Hill, Steven" <sjhill@mips.com>, "linux-mips@linux-mips.org" <linux-mips@linux-mips.org>, "cernekee@gmail.com" <cernekee@gmail.com>, "kevink@paralogos.com" <kevink@paralogos.com>
In-reply-to: <50F7289A.3000102@gmail.com>
List-archive: <http://www.linux-mips.org/archives/linux-mips/>
List-help: <mailto:ecartis@linux-mips.org?Subject=help>
List-id: linux-mips <linux-mips.eddie.linux-mips.org>
List-owner: <mailto:ralf@linux-mips.org>
List-post: <mailto:linux-mips@linux-mips.org>
List-software: Ecartis version 1.0.0
List-subscribe: <mailto:ecartis@linux-mips.org?subject=subscribe%20linux-mips>
List-unsubscribe: <mailto:ecartis@linux-mips.org?subject=unsubscribe%20linux-mips>
References: <1358230420-3575-1-git-send-email-sjhill@mips.com> <50F5B0D0.9010604@gmail.com> <31E06A9FC96CEC488B43B19E2957C1B801146C51CC@exchdb03.mips.com> <50F5DA93.2080706@gmail.com> <20130116141618.GC26569@linux-mips.org> <50F7289A.3000102@gmail.com>
Sender: linux-mips-bounce@linux-mips.org
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
On Wed, Jan 16, 2013 at 02:24:26PM -0800, David Daney wrote:

> ... In the very last BITFIELD_FIELD(), you need a valid token as the
> second parameter, otherwise (according to Pinski) C90 behavior is
> undefined.
> 
> Use a ';'

While Andrew is correct, I don't think this argument matters unless
we're going to export <asm/inst.h> to userspace.  Should we?  Historically
it was meant to be exported and accessed by application code from
<sys/inst.h>.

  Ralf

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>