Gedare.. does this look better?
posix_memalign() is prototyped to take a non-NULL parameter. But our
test is deliberately passing one in. With the -Wnon-null warning flag
enabled, we will always get warnings on this test unless we disable
that warning for this single test case.
---
testsuites/lib
On Wed, Nov 19, 2014 at 9:35 PM, Joel Sherrill
wrote:
>
>
> On November 19, 2014 8:34:23 PM CST, Gedare Bloom wrote:
>>I'd prefer to see it hidden behind a macro, like other
>>compiler-specific stuff (e.g. attributes). It could go in tmacros
>>also, since it should be restricted to testing.
>
> C
On November 19, 2014 8:34:23 PM CST, Gedare Bloom wrote:
>I'd prefer to see it hidden behind a macro, like other
>compiler-specific stuff (e.g. attributes). It could go in tmacros
>also, since it should be restricted to testing.
Can you write this as a macro?
>I will oppose any #pragma within
I'd prefer to see it hidden behind a macro, like other
compiler-specific stuff (e.g. attributes). It could go in tmacros
also, since it should be restricted to testing.
I will oppose any #pragma within cpukit or c subdirectories.
-Gedare
On Wed, Nov 19, 2014 at 5:45 PM, Joel Sherrill
wrote:
>
>
On 11/19/2014 4:32 PM, Chris Johns wrote:
> On 20/11/2014 6:59 am, Joel Sherrill wrote:
>> + #pragma GCC diagnostic push
>> + #pragma GCC diagnostic ignored "-Wnonnull"
> Do we allow the use of #pragma in RTEMS ?
I would say no except for this one particular class.
If a method has the proper p
On 20/11/2014 6:59 am, Joel Sherrill wrote:
+ #pragma GCC diagnostic push
+ #pragma GCC diagnostic ignored "-Wnonnull"
Do we allow the use of #pragma in RTEMS ?
Chris
___
devel mailing list
devel@rtems.org
http://lists.rtems.org/mailman/listinfo/de
posix_memalign() is prototyped to take a non-NULL parameter. But our
test is deliberately passing one in. With the -Wnon-null warning flag
enabled, we will always get warnings on this test unless we disable
that warning for this single test case.
---
testsuites/libtests/malloctest/init.c | 24
