Greg KH, le mar. 04 août 2020 17:49:52 +0200, a ecrit:
> > #define inb(c) ({ u8 __v; __io_pbr(); __v =
> > readb_cpu((void*)(PCI_IOBASE + (c))); __io_par(__v); __v; })
> >
> > and thus yes it's arithmetic over a (void*) pointer, the caller cannot
> > do anything about it.
>
> And that's fine, math with pointers, even void ones, is ok.
C++ doesn't like it, but in general compilers provide some semantic for
it, yes.
> I wonder why riscv was complaining about that. It's not nice, but it is
> valid C.
Strictly C speaking, no, but GNU C yes.
> Let's see if any of their developers care about it :)
Ok :) In the meanwhile I sent a v2 series that should fix the different
link cases, just not the particular riscv warning.
Samuel
