Re: [PATCH][2.5.74] correct gcc bug comment in <linux/spinlock.h>

[Russell King]

On Thu, Jul 03, 2003 at 06:08:11PM +0200, Mikael Pettersson wrote:
> Linus,
> 
> This patch updates include/linux/spinlock.h's comment regarding gcc
> bugs for empty struct initializers, to correctly state that the bug
> is present also in 2.95.x and at least early versions of 2.96 (as
> reported by one Mandrake user).
> 
> /Mikael
> 
> --- linux-2.5.74/include/linux/spinlock.h.~1~	2003-07-03 12:32:46.000000000 +0200
> +++ linux-2.5.74/include/linux/spinlock.h	2003-07-03 16:07:59.772534704 +0200
> @@ -144,7 +144,7 @@
>  	} while (0)
>  #else
>  /*
> - * gcc versions before ~2.95 have a nasty bug with empty initializers.
> + * gcc versions up to 2.95, and early versions of 2.96, have a nasty bug with empty initializers.
>   */
>  #if (__GNUC__ > 2)
>    typedef struct { } spinlock_t;

This also isn't that clear (does it mean up to 2.95.0 but not including
2.95.1 etc.)  Also, we don't build with gcc < 2.95 anyway, so there's
no need to mention anything older.  This removes the doubt:

"All gcc 2.95 versions and early versions of gcc 2.96 have a nasty bug with
 empty initializers."

-- 
Russell King ([e-mail])                The developer of ARM Linux
             http://www.arm.linux.org.uk/personal/aboutme.html