Re: Aarch64 EXT4FS inode checksum failures - seems to be weak memory ordering issues

On Tue, Jan 12, 2021 at 5:20 AM Lukas Wunner [off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

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.

We use anonymous structs/unions extensively and all over the place already.

We've had a couple of special cases where some versions of gcc didn't
do things right iirc (it was something like "nested anonymous struct"
or similar), but those weren't actually about the feature itself.

Was it perhaps the nested case you were thinking of? If so, I think
that's not really a --std=gun11 thing, it's more of a "certain
versions of gcc didn't do it at all".

               Linus

_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel