Paolo Bonzini <pbonz...@redhat.com> writes:
> On 19/01/2017 09:12, Markus Armbruster wrote:
>> "Michael S. Tsirkin" <m...@redhat.com> writes:
>>
>>> QEMU_BUILD_BUG_ON uses a typedef in order to be safe
>>> to use outside functions, but sometimes it's useful
>>> to have a version that can be used within an expression.
>>> Following what Linux does, introduce QEMU_BUILD_BUG_ON_ZERO
>>> that return zero after checking condition at build time.
>>
>> Following Linux's example makes sense, but I can't help but wonder
>> whether we need both QEMU_BUILD_BUG_ON_ZERO() and QEMU_BUILD_BUG_ON().
>
> I think so, most notably QEMU_BUILD_BUG_ON was added to C11 as
> _Static_assert but QEMU_BUILD_BUG_ON_ZERO wasn't.
Okay.
> But we can indeed redefine QEMU_BUILD_BUG_ON to
> (void)QEMU_BUILD_BUG_ON_ZERO(x) like Linux does, until we add optional
> support for _Static_assert.
Yes, please.
>>> Signed-off-by: Michael S. Tsirkin <m...@redhat.com>
>>> ---
>>> include/qemu/compiler.h | 2 ++
>>> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/include/qemu/compiler.h b/include/qemu/compiler.h
>>> index 2882470..f4cf13b 100644
>>> --- a/include/qemu/compiler.h
>>> +++ b/include/qemu/compiler.h
>>> @@ -89,6 +89,8 @@
>>> typedef char glue(qemu_build_bug_on__,__LINE__)[(x) ? -1 : 1] \
>>> __attribute__((unused))
>>>
>>> +#define QEMU_BUILD_BUG_ON_ZERO(x) (sizeof(int[(x) ? -1 : 1]) - sizeof(int))
>
> Linux here uses:
>
> #define BUILD_BUG_ON_ZERO(e) (sizeof(struct { int:-!!(e); }))
>
> and the issue is that sizeof(int[(x) ? -1 : 1]) could be
> runtime-evaluated (the type is a variable-length array).
Let's copy both macros from Linux.
