Messages in this thread | ![/](/images/icornerl.gif) | | Date | Sat, 13 Sep 2003 20:10:20 +0100 | From | Jamie Lokier <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] new ioctl type checking causes gcc warning |
| |
Kevin P. Fleming wrote: > >I had tried that first, but found that there are places that > >use asm/ioctl.h without including asm/posix_types.h first, so > >size_t might not be declared. unsigned int (or unsigned long) > >is the better alternative here. Does this look ok to everyone? > > After working on this some more this afternoon, I realize now that > it's much better to have the typechecking in place than not, even for > userspace. Maybe the best solution is to still leave the typechecking > (don't wrap it in #ifdef __KERNEL__), and just > > #ifdef size_t > extern size_t __invalid_size_argument_for_IOC; > #else > extern unsigned int __invalid_size_argument_for_IOC; > #endif
What's wrong with __typeof__(sizeof(0))?
-- Jamie - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| ![\](/images/icornerr.gif) |