public inbox for glibc-bugs@sourceware.org help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "carlos at redhat dot com" <sourceware-bugzilla@sourceware.org> To: glibc-bugs@sourceware.org Subject: [Bug network/16421] IN6_IS_ADDR_UNSPECIFIED can use undefined s6_addr32 Date: Tue, 04 Feb 2014 17:46:00 -0000 [thread overview] Message-ID: <bug-16421-131-1fg9hCvyLq@http.sourceware.org/bugzilla/> (raw) In-Reply-To: <bug-16421-131@http.sourceware.org/bugzilla/> https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16421 --- Comment #13 from Carlos O'Donell <carlos at redhat dot com> --- (In reply to Octavio Alvarez from comment #12) > Thank you. Today I have learned about statement expressions and how they are > GCC extensions. > > If we add an #ifdef __GNUC__ we would also have to add an #else that avoids > the usage of non-ISO C extensions anyway so Clang do not throw any warnings > or compilers that don't define __GNUC__ still have IN6_* macros available. > Again, two implementations. Now I understand why was the original code in > that form. That's correct. > If the goal is to have a universal implementation it's no use to have it > wrapped in #ifdef __GNUC__. It just stops being universal. Agreed, but have a __GNUC__ version optimized for GNUC is good. > Given the above, there is no use on exposing __in6_u.__u6_addr32 for the > purpose of fixing this bug, then. I don't follow. > Either we go back to patch #1, which keeps both implementations and just > adds the test for definition of __USE_GNU and __USE_MISC macros and does not > break strict compilers, or we remove the #ifdef __GNUC__ implementation > altogether and leave only the #else implementation unconditionally. Not an option. Please leave the __GNUC__ implementation for optimally supporting those using GNU extensions. > Sample of the #else implementation: > # define IN6_IS_ADDR_UNSPECIFIED(a) \ > (((const uint32_t *) (a))[0] == 0 > \ > && ((const uint32_t *) (a))[1] == 0 > \ > && ((const uint32_t *) (a))[2] == 0 > \ > && ((const uint32_t *) (a))[3] == 0) > > I will gladly attach a patch with just the #else implementation for your > review, but I still think the best bet to use the original patch. > > Git commit aff2453d [1] (Dec 2011) shows that originally, only the #else > implementation existed but Ulrich Drepper added a GCC-specific > implementation, apparently to avoid warnings. Later, in commit a784e502 [2] > (Jan 2012), he changed the usage of __const to plain const, removing pre-ISO > C implementations. The fix I'll accept is: - Unconditionally define __u6_* in the union. - Fix all the macros. - Test that. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-02-04 17:46 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 26+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top 2014-01-09 12:46 [Bug network/16421] New: " kazssym at vx68k dot org 2014-01-10 19:58 ` [Bug network/16421] " bugdal at aerifal dot cx 2014-01-11 9:57 ` kazssym at vx68k dot org 2014-01-11 15:29 ` bugdal at aerifal dot cx 2014-02-04 4:09 ` carlos at redhat dot com 2014-02-04 4:11 ` carlos at redhat dot com 2014-02-04 4:12 ` carlos at redhat dot com 2014-02-04 4:14 ` alvarezp at alvarezp dot ods.org 2014-02-04 4:59 ` alvarezp at alvarezp dot ods.org 2014-02-04 5:11 ` alvarezp at alvarezp dot ods.org 2014-02-04 14:55 ` carlos at redhat dot com 2014-02-04 17:30 ` alvarezp at alvarezp dot ods.org 2014-02-04 17:46 ` carlos at redhat dot com [this message] 2014-02-04 18:08 ` alvarezp at alvarezp dot ods.org 2014-02-04 18:16 ` carlos at redhat dot com 2014-02-04 18:55 ` carlos at redhat dot com 2014-02-04 18:57 ` carlos at redhat dot com 2014-02-04 22:30 ` alvarezp at alvarezp dot ods.org 2014-02-04 22:38 ` alvarezp at alvarezp dot ods.org 2014-02-04 22:51 ` joseph at codesourcery dot com 2014-02-04 22:54 ` carlos at redhat dot com 2014-02-05 0:03 ` joseph at codesourcery dot com 2014-02-06 23:13 ` alvarezp at alvarezp dot ods.org 2014-02-28 20:47 ` alvarezp at alvarezp dot ods.org 2014-06-13 9:08 ` fweimer at redhat dot com 2015-04-23 13:41 ` alvarezp at alvarezp dot ods.org
Reply instructions: You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email using any one of the following methods: * Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client, and reply-to-all from there: mbox Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style * Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to switches of git-send-email(1): git send-email \ --in-reply-to=bug-16421-131-1fg9hCvyLq@http.sourceware.org/bugzilla/ \ --to=sourceware-bugzilla@sourceware.org \ --cc=glibc-bugs@sourceware.org \ /path/to/YOUR_REPLY https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html * If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header via mailto: links, try the mailto: linkBe sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox; as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).