Subject: Re: [PATCH] powerpc/boot: Use address-of operator on section symbols

From: Segher Boessenkool <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 20 Jul 2020 16:02:52 -0500

Hi!

On Sat, Jul 18, 2020 at 09:50:50AM +0200, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 24, 2020 at 6:02 AM Nathan Chancellor
> <[email-masked]> wrote:
> >         /* If we have an image attached to us, it overrides anything
> >          * supplied by the loader. */
> > -       if (_initrd_end > _initrd_start) {
> > +       if (&_initrd_end > &_initrd_start) {
> 
> Are you sure that fix is correct?
> 
>     extern char _initrd_start[];
>     extern char _initrd_end[];
>     extern char _esm_blob_start[];
>     extern char _esm_blob_end[];
> 
> Of course the result of their comparison is a constant, as the addresses
> are constant.  If clangs warns about it, perhaps that warning should be moved
> to W=1?
> 
> But adding "&" is not correct, according to C.

Why not?

6.5.3.2/3
The unary & operator yields the address of its operand.  [...]
Otherwise, the result is a pointer to the object or function designated
by its operand.

This is the same as using the name of an array without anything else,
yes.  It is a bit clearer if it would not be declared as array, perhaps,
but it is correct just fine like this.

Segher