Received: by 2002:a05:6a10:2785:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id ia5csp3056276pxb; Tue, 12 Jan 2021 05:24:26 -0800 (PST) X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJy3Te6xN8etXpVir/AlsBn+wcyXGUuvqxW3IzbAPYK7tOffkEulr4GJhGa6HPt2x59QDFAD X-Received: by 2002:aa7:d459:: with SMTP id q25mr3383139edr.279.1610457866497; Tue, 12 Jan 2021 05:24:26 -0800 (PST) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1610457866; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=M7ssxPhE9d0gRcsodtWMcYaeaVABZN5aSHSWkZP8iM1O1+oiSwlvZKDQn04lcIrtzh gMdXtBclDhx/c7cuNUD/j2qvzIQDzRvBFpQ6/A/05oKlqb9D5wpTkA4lNN5bamrtDEbO RkyIPgMG2bJSOsC7sNB9i9x1NZg8ROukY3NR9SOLVVwzcGUiam6m0DG8mKHtQ5VIK1Kx tGGjZuwbE3ie42Qy5MiVJD+C8zsXDFoymlsjkRFsh398s3x+QrJhxmi6gN1f3OwFK4Ic QRmJ9f/vfTIXlkF4myNgI9PQI3o7eBNMoolxyoG/3HgCiVqLZvb5QSZus/OUGbeRnq5G EbGQ== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:user-agent:in-reply-to:content-disposition :mime-version:references:message-id:subject:cc:to:from:date; bh=3Dg8mGbOgp/+vd5+ISzjdprN4ECinOkay5JhVqVgNrs=; b=fygKcJANZCiaPO7fRhyNkLPMgk3GaGaF4U0DnhDcttg1RNrAqdPMAQ14RtDuaxD/+f l/1VOOvxoddJ4z+ZCmQYG2sPzjDXzK1KtdbUCu6C7EWvd5NG6B6ti20g2jUfKXzzNz+B E3zG1bRgqC8c3rkYWI9A9rtTLN3TCqx0h0NEP6wUT0MFo1DJ80yq9Fw7WSBDC+NcFWVC PlOfS16MHwXZkaaDMvvcW2uc01SqvvjIn+7kL8zGeY8L8Bw141bwL/hjrfTLVo17ipUe u8asZzum8ISosLY4edNC3AUbqcSOupZg0np4INxeCmW59suJmw+/ukYgpaqkOZIqHdfJ j4Ug== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [23.128.96.18]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id q21si1126807ejd.515.2021.01.12.05.24.01; Tue, 12 Jan 2021 05:24:26 -0800 (PST) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1732736AbhALNVd (ORCPT + 99 others); Tue, 12 Jan 2021 08:21:33 -0500 Received: from bmailout2.hostsharing.net ([83.223.78.240]:49391 "EHLO bmailout2.hostsharing.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1732265AbhALNVc (ORCPT ); Tue, 12 Jan 2021 08:21:32 -0500 Received: from h08.hostsharing.net (h08.hostsharing.net [IPv6:2a01:37:1000::53df:5f1c:0]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "*.hostsharing.net", Issuer "RapidSSL TLS DV RSA Mixed SHA256 2020 CA-1" (verified OK)) by bmailout2.hostsharing.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E08F82800B3D8; Tue, 12 Jan 2021 14:20:49 +0100 (CET) Received: by h08.hostsharing.net (Postfix, from userid 100393) id D48D850D7E; Tue, 12 Jan 2021 14:20:49 +0100 (CET) Date: Tue, 12 Jan 2021 14:20:49 +0100 From: Lukas Wunner To: Linus Torvalds Cc: Will Deacon , Peter Zijlstra , Arnd Bergmann , Russell King - ARM Linux admin , linux-toolchains@vger.kernel.org, Mark Rutland , Theodore Ts'o , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , Andreas Dilger , Ext4 Developers List , Linux ARM Subject: Re: Aarch64 EXT4FS inode checksum failures - seems to be weak memory ordering issues Message-ID: <20210112132049.GA26096@wunner.de> References: <20210106172033.GA2165@willie-the-truck> <20210106223223.GM1551@shell.armlinux.org.uk> <20210107111841.GN1551@shell.armlinux.org.uk> <20210107124506.GO1551@shell.armlinux.org.uk> <20210107133747.GP1551@shell.armlinux.org.uk> <20210108092655.GA4031@willie-the-truck> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13) Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Jan 08, 2021 at 12:02:53PM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote: > I appreciate Arnd pointing out "--std=gnu11", though. What are the > actual relevant language improvements? > > Variable declarations in for-loops is the only one I can think of. I > think that would clean up some code (and some macros), but might not > be compelling on its own. Anonymous structs/unions. I used to have a use case for that in struct efi_dev_path in include/linux/efi.h, but Ard Biesheuvel refactored it in a gnu89-compatible way for v5.7 with db8952e7094f. [The above was copy-pasted from last time this discussion came up in July 2020. Back then, Kirill Shutemov likewise mentioned the local variables in loops feature: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20200710111724.m4jaci73pykalxys@wunner.de/ ] Thanks, Lukas