Re: [Qemu-devel] Re: [PATCH 0/7] clean build - eliminate warnings

[Jan Kiszka <jan.kiszka@web.de>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3372 bytes --]

Edgar E. Iglesias wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 21, 2009 at 09:09:01PM +0100, Jan Kiszka wrote:
>> Laurent Desnogues wrote:
>>> On Sat, Feb 21, 2009 at 8:00 PM, Jan Kiszka <jan.kiszka@web.de> wrote:
>>>> When working on larger or intrusive changes like the monitor rework, the
>>>> number of warnings a normal build generates (here: x86-64 host, gcc 4.3)
>>>> is still too high. And sometimes these warnings are not just of cosmetic
>>>> nature, see (reposted) patch 3.
>>>>
>>>> This series reduces the number of warnings significantly, still not to
>>>> zero (someone would have to look into the NetWinder stuff), but almost:
>>>>
>>>> Warning summary for 2009-02-21 (changes since 2009-02-21-base)
>>>>  generic          0    (-1)
>>>>  softmmu          0   (-39)
>>>>    x86            0     (0)
>>>>    arm            0   (-10)
>>> This means that after applying your patch there should be no more
>>> warning for the ARM target?
>> At least for softmmu, at least with my compiler (depending on the
>> precise version / distro patches, you may have different warnings
>> enabled by default): yes.
>>
>>> On my machine (x86_64, gcc 4.1.2), I still get these:
>>>
>>>   CC    arm-softmmu/neon_helper.o
>>> /home/ldesnogu/work/Emu/qemu/svn-ref/target-arm/neon_helper.c: In
>>> function ?helper_neon_rshl_s8?:
>>> /home/ldesnogu/work/Emu/qemu/svn-ref/target-arm/neon_helper.c:469:
>>> warning: ?vdest.v1? is used uninitialized in this function
>>> /home/ldesnogu/work/Emu/qemu/svn-ref/target-arm/neon_helper.c:469:
>>> warning: ?vdest.v2? is used uninitialized in this function
>>> /home/ldesnogu/work/Emu/qemu/svn-ref/target-arm/neon_helper.c:469:
>>> warning: ?vdest.v3? is used uninitialized in this function
>>> /home/ldesnogu/work/Emu/qemu/svn-ref/target-arm/neon_helper.c:469:
>>> warning: ?vdest.v4? is used uninitialized in this function
>>> /home/ldesnogu/work/Emu/qemu/svn-ref/target-arm/neon_helper.c: In
>>> function ?helper_neon_rshl_s16?:
>>> /home/ldesnogu/work/Emu/qemu/svn-ref/target-arm/neon_helper.c:470:
>>> warning: ?vdest.v1? is used uninitialized in this function
>>> /home/ldesnogu/work/Emu/qemu/svn-ref/target-arm/neon_helper.c:470:
>>> warning: ?vdest.v2? is used uninitialized in this function
>>> /home/ldesnogu/work/Emu/qemu/svn-ref/target-arm/neon_helper.c: In
>>> function ?helper_neon_rshl_s32?:
>>> /home/ldesnogu/work/Emu/qemu/svn-ref/target-arm/neon_helper.c:471:
>>> warning: ?vdest.v1? is used uninitialized in this function
>> Has this been identified as a real issue or just compiler blindness (my
>> series contains one "fix" for such blindness, see cris patch)? I'm
> 
> Sorry, I missed any posted CRIS patch. Please post it again if you
> have one and please CC me and I'll apply it if I agree with it.
> 
> Sorry if I missed your email.

There is nothing you missed, I was referring to patch 5 of this series.
I'll sent out a fixed version soon and put you on CC this time.

The point is that I lost a bit interest in building up proper CC lists
here due to the (IMHO) broken list configuration of inserting reply-to
headers. That way CCs typically get lost when someone picks up a thread
from the list. Unfortunately, no one replied on my RFC [1] to fix this
(because I forgot the proper CCs? :->).

Jan

[1] http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.emulators.qemu/28472


[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 257 bytes --]