Willy, Am 23.01.20 um 19:17 schrieb Willy Tarreau: > Thanks for the test! So basically this clearly proves we respect the > calling convention but the compiler still complains. OK I'm seeing in > the mad that it's for functions "decorated" with the "alloc_size" > attribute. Thus in short they enforce constraints that cannot be > expressed with available types. This is becoming totally ridiculous.
Googling for that error message says something about the *result* needing to fit into ptrdiff_t and also something about negative numbers. Maybe it is sufficient to change `nbthread` from `int` to `unsigned int`? Otherwise the compiler assumes that a negative nbthread casted to an unsigned value becomes too large. I didn't check whether the code assumes that nbthread can be negative anywhere. Best regards Tim Düsterhus
