From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from psmtp.com (na3sys010amx155.postini.com [74.125.245.155]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 2CC626B004D for ; Mon, 30 Jul 2012 22:07:24 -0400 (EDT) Received: by pbbrp2 with SMTP id rp2so12280817pbb.14 for ; Mon, 30 Jul 2012 19:07:23 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2012 19:07:20 -0700 (PDT) From: David Rientjes Subject: Re: [PATCH TRIVIAL] mm: Fix build warning in kmem_cache_create() In-Reply-To: Message-ID: References: <1342221125.17464.8.camel@lorien2> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: To: Pekka Enberg Cc: shuah.khan@hp.com, cl@linux.com, glommer@parallels.com, js1304@gmail.com, shuahkhan@gmail.com, linux-mm@kvack.org, LKML , Andrew Morton , Linus Torvalds On Mon, 30 Jul 2012, Pekka Enberg wrote: > > -Wunused-label is overridden in gcc for a label that is conditionally > > referenced by using __maybe_unused in the kernel. I'm not sure what's so > > obscure about > > > > out: __maybe_unused > > > > Are label attributes really that obsecure? > > I think they are. > > The real problem, however, is that label attributes would just paper > over the badly thought out control flow in the function and not make the > code any better or easier to read. > So much for compromise, I thought we had agreed that at least some of the checks for !name, in_interrupt() or bad size values should be moved out from under the #ifdef CONFIG_DEBUG_VM, but this wasn't done. This discussion would be irrelevent if we actually did what we talked about. -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: email@kvack.org