Received: by 2002:a05:6358:53a8:b0:117:f937:c515 with SMTP id z40csp1897733rwe; Sat, 15 Apr 2023 07:56:05 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: AKy350bNr36owzc2uVvBXdhHjoHjSE+UnkpE0HdkTLfSn2QGb3MjeGTt3K+yhjBov7E//KnCBBPF X-Received: by 2002:a17:902:cf02:b0:1a6:b23c:3bf2 with SMTP id i2-20020a170902cf0200b001a6b23c3bf2mr2895161plg.10.1681570564945; Sat, 15 Apr 2023 07:56:04 -0700 (PDT) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1681570564; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=EOyGnBET60Gj+mMqilXwujUj2ypZoxzjWNgOKzH9pUB3lxLkUEQB3120oB3/DZXZt4 qldhdb/+V276i3LCtf1CLfq4LYqIKAUFqHcgizYDFQ2GTWB2iEsbWuYrrHNSCxfMoHf+ 5yLCTYhISx94q05lJa9kFYUkgDQRlPdBrD9M9DFr5vTp7zUDui5SGurla0g4rsa/CrhL blHdPLLkPROqdvjcsTUbEyqfOO09pOp3v6phCLRW/8pyxkWsZfkcShvYFoYyqmxNKTk8 okn5ye4NsTCOL1cBiSELk/kU+WAV1UkV36TrgWLOfuu+EmVwNNNq4AM60tOx9QyIB4MK R1JA== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding :content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id:subject:cc :to:from:date; bh=hG2nb5b8YySEgCbow0eb17u5WdfC/oZBmLudpO4iEtg=; b=Gk2iOIuKZg2idrDCTqqp/1R46TssPGqyghzSXMh2MHux2Kt9Ax118SDku0Z3iIRINe 5hn0R0Rf8TQTWBNfeyJlQiJpKZLOpR1LtaS6o+W/k/1+7UvtqsXYc9xPQJBiTuj5KQhK Fto/6w9y1RnnTAWYvk8t8ZNB0Ujxkqky14BRmLkTHR8pyLq4r64PpdK/gzrjB4th29Bd Pf2+kUhaijZC5UBNr3ZWUXHdViZ4H3tcguEEW68kVSt+dVlSYlXWFcQBXIEJPBWNAMLj lASJiVSstczA4UQj88gURMfo69vwp09mvAn+8GW/yUuRazg0UZhQQmdYaY1RqqIY/cxf terQ== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Return-Path: Received: from out1.vger.email (out1.vger.email. [2620:137:e000::1:20]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id p11-20020a1709026b8b00b0019a9b869bfasi7054117plk.75.2023.04.15.07.55.48; Sat, 15 Apr 2023 07:56:04 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S229829AbjDOOrY (ORCPT + 99 others); Sat, 15 Apr 2023 10:47:24 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:52786 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S229545AbjDOOrX (ORCPT ); Sat, 15 Apr 2023 10:47:23 -0400 Received: from 1wt.eu (ded1.1wt.eu [163.172.96.212]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 59D2135AE; Sat, 15 Apr 2023 07:47:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from willy@localhost) by mail.home.local (8.17.1/8.17.1/Submit) id 33FEl3j6019919; Sat, 15 Apr 2023 16:47:03 +0200 Date: Sat, 15 Apr 2023 16:47:03 +0200 From: Willy Tarreau To: Thomas =?iso-8859-1?Q?Wei=DFschuh?= Cc: Shuah Khan , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 00/11] tools/nolibc: -std=c89 compatibility Message-ID: References: <20230328-nolibc-c99-v2-0-c989f2289222@weissschuh.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,SPF_HELO_PASS, SPF_PASS autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on lindbergh.monkeyblade.net Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hi Thomas, On Sun, Apr 09, 2023 at 11:28:46AM +0200, Willy Tarreau wrote: > Hi Thomas, > > On Thu, Apr 06, 2023 at 09:54:46PM +0000, Thomas Wei?schuh wrote: > > This series replaces the C99 compatibility patch. (See v1 link below). > > After the discussion about support C99 and/or GNU89 I came to the > > conclusion supporting straight C89 is not very hard. > > > > Instead of validating both C99 and GNU89 in some awkward way only for > > somebody requesting true C89 support let's just do it this way. > > > > Feel free to squash all the comment syntax patches together if you > > prefer. > > I gave it some thought, at first considering that going lower than GNU89 > was possibly not very useful, but given that the changes are very small > in the end (mostly comments formating), I think that you're right. The > cost of reaching this level of portability is basically zero once the > patch is applied so I think it's worth doing it now. However I think I > will indeed squash all the comments patch together as you suggest. I've now squashed the ones about comments together, fixed the declaration inside the for statement in nolibc-test and tested with gcc 4.7 & 4.8 and confirmed it works as expected. I've queued it there for now: https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/wtarreau/nolibc.git/log/?h=20230415-nolibc-updates-4a Thank you! Willy