Peter Xu <pet...@redhat.com> writes: > On Wed, Mar 09, 2016 at 08:53:19AM +0100, Paolo Bonzini wrote: >> >> >> On 09/03/2016 06:08, Peter Xu wrote: >> > pxdev:bin# gcc -v >> > Using built-in specs. >> > COLLECT_GCC=/bin/gcc >> > COLLECT_LTO_WRAPPER=/usr/libexec/gcc/x86_64-redhat-linux/4.8.5/lto-wrapper >> > Target: x86_64-redhat-linux >> > Configured with: ../configure --prefix=/usr --mandir=/usr/share/man >> > --infodir=/usr/share/info >> > --with-bugurl=http://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla --enable-bootstrap >> > --enable-shared --enable-threads=posix --enable-checking=release >> > --with-system-zlib --enable-__cxa_atexit --disable-libunwind-exceptions >> > --enable-gnu-unique-object --enable-linker-build-id >> > --with-linker-hash-style=gnu >> > --enable-languages=c,c++,objc,obj-c++,java,fortran,ada,go,lto >> > --enable-plugin --enable-initfini-array --disable-libgcj >> > --with-isl=/builddir/build/BUILD/gcc-4.8.5-20150702/obj-x86_64-redhat-linux/isl-install >> > >> > --with-cloog=/builddir/build/BUILD/gcc-4.8.5-20150702/obj-x86_64-redhat-linux/cloog-install >> > --enable-gnu-indirect-function --with-tune=generic --with-arch_32=x86-64 >> > --build=x86_64-redhat-linux >> > Thread model: posix >> > gcc version 4.8.5 20150623 (Red Hat 4.8.5-4) (GCC) >> > >> > Do you know why "might not be inlinable"? Failed to figure it out >> > myself as mentioned in cover letter.. >> >> It's just a difference in compiler versions. But ARRAY_SIZE should be >> enough to fix it. > > It's dynamically allocated in stack, can we still use ARRAY_SIZE in > this case?
ARRAY_SIZE(x) is defined as (sizeof(x) / sizeof((x)[0])). Works when x is of array type (variable length array is fine). Screws up when x is of *pointer* type. C99 6.5.3.4: The sizeof operator yields the size (in bytes) of its operand, which may be an expression or the parenthesized name of a type. The size is determined from the type of the operand. The result is an integer. If the type of the operand is a variable length array type, the operand is evaluated; otherwise, the operand is not evaluated and the result is an integer constant. [...]