Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
Date:   Sat, 17 Nov 2018 01:45:01 +0100
From:   Luc Van Oostenryck <luc.vanoostenryck@gmail.com>
To:     Johannes Berg <johannes@sipsolutions.net>
Cc:     linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org,
        Johannes Berg <johannes.berg@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/3] kernel.h: hide __is_constexpr() from sparse
Message-ID: <20181117004500.xipguiszdbs63dle@ltop.local>
References: <20181109093534.15121-1-johannes@sipsolutions.net>
 <20181109093534.15121-2-johannes@sipsolutions.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20181109093534.15121-2-johannes@sipsolutions.net>
User-Agent: NeoMutt/20180622
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Fri, Nov 09, 2018 at 10:35:33AM +0100, Johannes Berg wrote:
> From: Johannes Berg <johannes.berg@intel.com>
> 
> __is_constexpr() is a work of art, understandable only to the most
> respected wizards of C. Even sparse doesn't seem to belong to that
> group and warns that there's an "expression using sizeof(void)".
> 
> Just hide the definition from sparse and pretend it's always true.

The development version of sparse doesn't issues a warning for
sizeof(void) soon after the introduction of __is_constexpr()
and sparse's main tree have been updated (very recently).

I strongly believe this patch shouldn't be.

Regards,
-- Luc