ieee754dp has bitfield member in struct without name. And this
cause compilation error. This patch removes struct in ieee754dp
declaration. So compilation error is fixed.
Signed-off-by: Eunbong Song <[email protected]>
---
arch/mips/math-emu/ieee754.h | 20 ++++++++------------
1 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)
diff --git a/arch/mips/math-emu/ieee754.h b/arch/mips/math-emu/ieee754.h
index 43c4fb5..c6e28b8 100644
--- a/arch/mips/math-emu/ieee754.h
+++ b/arch/mips/math-emu/ieee754.h
@@ -32,22 +32,18 @@
#include <asm/bitfield.h>
union ieee754dp {
- struct {
- __BITFIELD_FIELD(unsigned int sign:1,
- __BITFIELD_FIELD(unsigned int bexp:11,
- __BITFIELD_FIELD(u64 mant:52,
- ;)))
- };
+ __BITFIELD_FIELD(unsigned int sign:1,
+ __BITFIELD_FIELD(unsigned int bexp:11,
+ __BITFIELD_FIELD(u64 mant:52,
+ ;)))
u64 bits;
};
union ieee754sp {
- struct {
- __BITFIELD_FIELD(unsigned sign:1,
- __BITFIELD_FIELD(unsigned bexp:8,
- __BITFIELD_FIELD(unsigned mant:23,
- ;)))
- };
+ __BITFIELD_FIELD(unsigned sign:1,
+ __BITFIELD_FIELD(unsigned bexp:8,
+ __BITFIELD_FIELD(unsigned mant:23,
+ ;)))
u32 bits;
};
--
1.7.0.1????{.n?+???????+%?????ݶ??w??{.n?+????{??G?????{ay? ʇڙ?,j??f???h?????????z_??(?階?ݢj"???m??????G????????????&???~???iO???z??v?^?m???? ????????I?
On Wed, Jun 11, 2014 at 09:24:51AM +0000, Eunbong Song wrote:
> ieee754dp has bitfield member in struct without name. And this
> cause compilation error. This patch removes struct in ieee754dp
> declaration. So compilation error is fixed.
> Signed-off-by: Eunbong Song <[email protected]>
What gcc version are you using?
Ralf
On Wed, 11 Jun 2014, Ralf Baechle wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 11, 2014 at 09:24:51AM +0000, Eunbong Song wrote:
>
> > ieee754dp has bitfield member in struct without name. And this
> > cause compilation error. This patch removes struct in ieee754dp
> > declaration. So compilation error is fixed.
> > Signed-off-by: Eunbong Song <[email protected]>
>
> What gcc version are you using?
>
make arch/mips/math-emu/ieee754.o for mips defconfig triggers the
following on linux-next 30 times:
arch/mips/math-emu/ieee754.c:45:2: error: unknown field 'sign' specified in initializer
arch/mips/math-emu/ieee754.c:45:2: warning: missing braces around initializer
arch/mips/math-emu/ieee754.c:45:2: warning: (near initialization for '__ieee754dp_spcvals[0].<anonymous>')
arch/mips/math-emu/ieee754.c:45:2: error: unknown field 'bexp' specified in initializer
arch/mips/math-emu/ieee754.c:45:2: warning: excess elements in union initializer
arch/mips/math-emu/ieee754.c:45:2: warning: (near initialization for '__ieee754dp_spcvals[0]')
arch/mips/math-emu/ieee754.c:45:2: error: unknown field 'mant' specified in initializer
arch/mips/math-emu/ieee754.c:45:2: warning: excess elements in union initializer
arch/mips/math-emu/ieee754.c:45:2: warning: (near initialization for '__ieee754dp_spcvals[0]')
I'm using gcc 4.5.1 for mips. The patch makes all members part of the
union so it's probably not what you want to fix it, though.
> What gcc version are you using?
> Ralf
I am using gcc 4.4.1.
Thanks.????{.n?+???????+%?????ݶ??w??{.n?+????{??G?????{ay? ʇڙ?,j??f???h?????????z_??(?階?ݢj"???m??????G????????????&???~???iO???z??v?^?m???? ????????I?
On Wed, 11 Jun 2014, David Rientjes wrote:
> > > ieee754dp has bitfield member in struct without name. And this
> > > cause compilation error. This patch removes struct in ieee754dp
> > > declaration. So compilation error is fixed.
> > > Signed-off-by: Eunbong Song <[email protected]>
> >
> > What gcc version are you using?
> >
>
> make arch/mips/math-emu/ieee754.o for mips defconfig triggers the
> following on linux-next 30 times:
>
> arch/mips/math-emu/ieee754.c:45:2: error: unknown field 'sign' specified in initializer
> arch/mips/math-emu/ieee754.c:45:2: warning: missing braces around initializer
> arch/mips/math-emu/ieee754.c:45:2: warning: (near initialization for '__ieee754dp_spcvals[0].<anonymous>')
> arch/mips/math-emu/ieee754.c:45:2: error: unknown field 'bexp' specified in initializer
> arch/mips/math-emu/ieee754.c:45:2: warning: excess elements in union initializer
> arch/mips/math-emu/ieee754.c:45:2: warning: (near initialization for '__ieee754dp_spcvals[0]')
> arch/mips/math-emu/ieee754.c:45:2: error: unknown field 'mant' specified in initializer
> arch/mips/math-emu/ieee754.c:45:2: warning: excess elements in union initializer
> arch/mips/math-emu/ieee754.c:45:2: warning: (near initialization for '__ieee754dp_spcvals[0]')
>
> I'm using gcc 4.5.1 for mips. The patch makes all members part of the
> union so it's probably not what you want to fix it, though.
There's more recent breakage like this, e.g.:
mm/page_io.c: In function '__swap_writepage':
mm/page_io.c:277: error: unknown field 'bvec' specified in initializer
mm/page_io.c:278: warning: excess elements in struct initializer
mm/page_io.c:278: warning: (near initialization for 'from')
introduced with "bio_vec-backed iov_iter" (GCC 4.1.2 here). We still in
principle support GCC versions back to 3.2:
$ grep 'Gnu C' Documentation/Changes
o Gnu C 3.2 # gcc --version
$
so either this breakage has to be cleaned up or the requirement for the
minimum GCC version revisited.
This is a semi-standard language extension BTW, citing from the GCC
manual:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
6 Extensions to the C Language Family
*************************************
GNU C provides several language features not found in ISO standard C.
(The `-pedantic' option directs GCC to print a warning message if any
of these features is used.) To test for the availability of these
features in conditional compilation, check for a predefined macro
`__GNUC__', which is always defined under GCC.
6.59 Unnamed struct/union fields within structs/unions
======================================================
As permitted by ISO C11 and for compatibility with other compilers, GCC
allows you to define a structure or union that contains, as fields,
structures and unions without names.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
-- note the term "permitted" rather than "required".
We do make use of a few GCC language extensions, most notably inline
assembly, however in this case we merely save a couple of characters here
and there and this is IMO not worth breaking people's development
environments.
Maciej