From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1KRt7P-0000Be-UK
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sat, 09 Aug 2008 14:24:48 -0400
Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1KRt7P-0000BK-72
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sat, 09 Aug 2008 14:24:47 -0400
Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=38894 helo=monty-python.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1KRt7P-0000BH-1O
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sat, 09 Aug 2008 14:24:47 -0400
Received: from mail-gx0-f23.google.com ([209.85.217.23]:64081)
	by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60)
	(envelope-from <anthony@codemonkey.ws>) id 1KRt7O-0005DP-TE
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sat, 09 Aug 2008 14:24:46 -0400
Received: by gxk4 with SMTP id 4so6204773gxk.10
	for <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>; Sat, 09 Aug 2008 11:24:45 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <489DE0C7.9000505@codemonkey.ws>
Date: Sat, 09 Aug 2008 13:24:07 -0500
From: Anthony Liguori <anthony@codemonkey.ws>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [RFC, PATCH] Add -Wstrict-prototypes, maybe later
	-Wmissing-prototypes
References: <f43fc5580808081022l28c9bd7bs45cfe8a94e32e308@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <f43fc5580808081022l28c9bd7bs45cfe8a94e32e308@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Reply-To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org
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: qemu-devel@nongnu.org

Blue Swirl wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I made a series of patches that add -Wstrict-prototypes to the CFLAGS
> and then -Wmissing-prototypes, both of which are enabled by Xen. I
> also fixed most warnings generated -Wstrict-prototypes and some of
> them for the -Wmissing-prototypes case.
>
> Compiling with -Wstrict-prototypes produces only one extra warning. I
> think this flag should be enabled.
>   

As long as the plan is to fix all of those warnings, I think it's a good 
idea.

Regards,

Anthony Liguori

> But dyngen targets spew a lot of noise with -Wmissing-prototypes so
> I'm not proposing to add that (or maybe that should be coupled with
> CONFIG_DYNGEN_OP). This also meant that I did not care enough to fix
> all warnings. The current warning fix should be safe to apply anyway.
>
> Comments?
>