From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1NVG6b-0000Gi-AH
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 13 Jan 2010 22:10:41 -0500
Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1NVG6W-0000GW-Aa
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 13 Jan 2010 22:10:40 -0500
Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=53477 helo=monty-python.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1NVG6W-0000GT-5r
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 13 Jan 2010 22:10:36 -0500
Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:5206)
	by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60)
	(envelope-from <amit.shah@redhat.com>) id 1NVG6V-00084d-PS
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 13 Jan 2010 22:10:36 -0500
Date: Thu, 14 Jan 2010 08:39:24 +0530
From: Amit Shah <amit.shah@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] Static analysis using clang on the x86_64 target
Message-ID: <20100114030924.GF24002@amit-x200.redhat.com>
References: <20100112181307.GD19438@amit-x200.redhat.com>
	<f43fc5581001121135x790c1fb1yf3ba5883ac6bd8c3@mail.gmail.com>
	<20100113070254.GD31063@amit-x200.redhat.com>
	<f43fc5581001131108x69dd887cme8c242b963714558@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <f43fc5581001131108x69dd887cme8c242b963714558@mail.gmail.com>
List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.gnu.org/pipermail/qemu-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: Blue Swirl <blauwirbel@gmail.com>
Cc: qemu-devel@nongnu.org

On (Wed) Jan 13 2010 [19:08:11], Blue Swirl wrote:
> 
> Thanks. I fixed the warnings related to Sparc32. Were there really no
> new warnings for Sparc64?

Looks like it; vl.c gets reported three times at the same locations so 3
arches have been compiled.

My test machine is down ATM, I can confirm later when it's up.

BTW for the patch

commit 884a0c7677cf8431d2a632673914994c2e01673d

    pcnet: remove dead nested assignment, spotted by clang
    
diff --git a/hw/pcnet.c b/hw/pcnet.c
index 91d106d..44b5b31 100644
--- a/hw/pcnet.c
+++ b/hw/pcnet.c
@@ -1608,7 +1608,7 @@ static void pcnet_aprom_writeb(void *opaque,
uint32_t addr, uint32_t val)
 static uint32_t pcnet_aprom_readb(void *opaque, uint32_t addr)
 {
     PCNetState *s = opaque;
-    uint32_t val = s->prom[addr &= 15];
+    uint32_t val = s->prom[addr & 15];
 #ifdef PCNET_DEBUG
     printf("pcnet_aprom_readb addr=0x%08x val=0x%02x\n", addr, val);
 #endif


if debugging is enabled, addr will now print a different value than
earlier.

		Amit