qemu-devel
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [PULL 00/12] Compile QEMU with -Wimplicit-fallthrough


From: Thomas Huth
Subject: Re: [PULL 00/12] Compile QEMU with -Wimplicit-fallthrough
Date: Thu, 17 Dec 2020 14:03:47 +0100
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.4.0

On 17/12/2020 13.51, Peter Maydell wrote:
> On Wed, 16 Dec 2020 at 17:29, Thomas Huth <thuth@redhat.com> wrote:
>>
>>  Hi!
>>
>> The following changes since commit af3f37319cb1e1ca0c42842ecdbd1bcfc64a4b6f:
>>
>>   Merge remote-tracking branch 'remotes/bonzini-gitlab/tags/for-upstream' 
>> into staging (2020-12-15 21:24:31 +0000)
>>
>> are available in the Git repository at:
>>
>>   https://gitlab.com/huth/qemu.git tags/pull-request-2020-12-16
>>
>> for you to fetch changes up to cbbedfeeb77e25b065f8a2b0c33e81403edaf728:
>>
>>   configure: Compile with -Wimplicit-fallthrough=2 (2020-12-16 12:52:20 
>> +0100)
>>
>> ----------------------------------------------------------------
>> * Compile QEMU with -Wimplicit-fallthrough=2 to avoid bugs in
>>   switch-case statements
>> ----------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> Hi; this generates a new warning on the NetBSD build:
> 
> ../src/bsd-user/main.c: In function 'cpu_loop':
> ../src/bsd-user/main.c:513:16: warning: this statement may fall
> through [-Wimplicit-fallthrough=]
>              if (bsd_type != target_freebsd)
>                 ^
> ../src/bsd-user/main.c:515:9: note: here
>          case 0x100:
>          ^~~~

Oh man, can't we just ditch the bsd-user folder now? It's known to be broken
since many releases, so it's currently only causing additional effort to
keep this code compilable (also with regards to the automatic code scan tool
reports that we've seen during the past months), without real benefit. Even
if the BSD folks finally upstream their fixed version again, it's more
likely that they will start from scratch again instead of fixing the old
folder, I guess?

 Thomas




reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]