lint: fix size of struct with large alignment

Lint now successfully passes all compile-time assertions in the amd64
kernel that deal with struct sizes.

lint: support _Alignas and __attribute__((__aligned(4)))

lint: warn about function definitions without header declaration

The existing warning was only issued for function declarations, not for
function definitions.

The interesting change in the tests is

lint: warn about function definitions without header declaration

The existing warning was only issued for function declarations, not for
function definitions.

The interesting change in the tests is in msg_351.c. Many other tests
use non-static functions due to their syntactic brevity. In these
tests, the warning is disabled individually, to allow new functions to
be added without generating warning 351.

show more ...

tests/lint: add more information to test for __attribute__((aligned))

Declaring an array type having a negative dimension is the simplest way
to embed an integer into a lint diagnostic, thereby reve

tests/lint: add more information to test for __attribute__((aligned))

Declaring an array type having a negative dimension is the simplest way
to embed an integer into a lint diagnostic, thereby revealing what size
and alignment lint has calculated for a struct.

While here, move these "compile-time assertions" closer to their
corresponding struct, to make reading easier.

show more ...

tests/lint: add another test for aligned struct member

In the kernel, several structs have this attribute, and running lint on
them runs into a compile-time assertion. Typical error messages are:

tests/lint: add another test for aligned struct member

In the kernel, several structs have this attribute, and running lint on
them runs into a compile-time assertion. Typical error messages are:

* error: illegal bit-field size: 255 [36]
* error: integral constant expression expected [55]

show more ...

tests/lint: make 'expect+-' comments stricter

Previously, the expectations from these comments were already satisfied
if the expectation occurred somewhere in the actual message from lint.
This mean

tests/lint: make 'expect+-' comments stricter

Previously, the expectations from these comments were already satisfied
if the expectation occurred somewhere in the actual message from lint.
This meant that the prefix 'error:' or 'warning:' could be omitted from
the 'expect' comment. These omissions were hard to see in a manual
review. Now any omissions must be visually marked with '...'.

The test msg_342 now reports its messages properly as being in the file
msg_342.c, rather than msg_341.c. This had been a copy-and-paste
mistake.

show more ...

tests/lint: expect complete messages in feature tests

Previously, the tests contained many comments like /* expect: 123 */,
which were useless to a casual reader since nobody is expected to learn
li

tests/lint: expect complete messages in feature tests

Previously, the tests contained many comments like /* expect: 123 */,
which were useless to a casual reader since nobody is expected to learn
lint's message IDs by heart. Replace these with the complete
diagnostics, to show what lint is complaining about.

The tests named msg_*.c have been left unmodified since they mention the
full message text in their header comment.

No functional change.

show more ...

tests/lint: demonstrate missing support for __packed __aligned