On Tue, Jan 03, 2017 at 02:17:38PM +0100, Andrea Bolognani wrote:
On Tue, 2017-01-03 at 13:46 +0100, Martin Kletzander wrote:
To solve the issue, turn virFirewallAddRule() from a very thin wrapper around virFirewallAddRuleFullV() to a macro that expands to a call to virFirewallAddRuleFull() - itself a very thin wrapper around the aforementioned virFirewallAddRuleFullV() - with no loss of functionality or type safety. --- This only seems to be required on very specific combinations of Clang and host OS, eg. I need it on Clang 3.9 / Fedora rawhide but not on Clang 3.8 or 4.0 / Debian sid. We sent various patches for this (me, Jan and maybe other people as well). I never realized it's not a problem with different versions of clang.
Oh, must have missed the previous attempts to fix this.
I would say it's not a problem for us to solve it in this case, however, as I wrote in my solution, it works, but it's undefined from the specification point of view. Can it work just because virFirewallAddRule() gets optimized into inline function? it shouldn't be, though... I don't know.
I lean towards merging this or a comparable solution. It's true that we aren't currently hitting this on our main targets, but relying on undefined behavior is definitely something we want to avoid, plus I don't see any real drawbacks in changing this to a macro.
Feel free to have a look at the other approaches (and whole threads) and see what you like: - https://www.redhat.com/archives/libvir-list/2016-June/msg02173.html - https://www.redhat.com/archives/libvir-list/2016-December/msg00379.html Yeah, it goes a long way back, and I know about even longer standing clang problems that we're just not dealing with. Martin
-- Andrea Bolognani / Red Hat / Virtualization
-- libvir-list mailing list libvir-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list