David Chisnall
2014-Jul-05 13:10 UTC
[HEADS-UP] Problem with clang in 9-stable [was: r268244 (stable/9) seems to break "sysctl hw.ncpu"]
On 5 Jul 2014, at 14:07, Dimitry Andric <dim at FreeBSD.org> wrote:> Interestingly, -Wno-uninitialized has been in bsd.sys.mk since r76861, > and the accompanying comment ("XXX Delete -Wuninitialized by default for > now -- the compiler doesn't always get it right") has never been > changed. :-) > > It is probably time to re-enable that warning after 13 years, at least.It probably only wants enabling for clang. GCC (at least, GCC 4.2.1) performs this analysis based on analyses run by the optimisers and so the warnings are dependent on optimisation level. David
On 07/05/14 15:10, David Chisnall wrote:> On 5 Jul 2014, at 14:07, Dimitry Andric <dim at FreeBSD.org> wrote: > >> Interestingly, -Wno-uninitialized has been in bsd.sys.mk since r76861, >> and the accompanying comment ("XXX Delete -Wuninitialized by default for >> now -- the compiler doesn't always get it right") has never been >> changed. :-) >> >> It is probably time to re-enable that warning after 13 years, at least. > > It probably only wants enabling for clang. GCC (at least, GCC 4.2.1) performs this analysis based on analyses run by the optimisers and so the warnings are dependent on optimisation level. > > DavidHi, Is someone working on this? --HPS
[-stable to bcc; keeping -current] On Tue, 15 Jul 2014, Hans Petter Selasky wrote:> On 07/05/14 15:10, David Chisnall wrote: >> On 5 Jul 2014, at 14:07, Dimitry Andric <dim@FreeBSD.org> wrote: >> >>> Interestingly, -Wno-uninitialized has been in bsd.sys.mk since r76861, >>> and the accompanying comment ("XXX Delete -Wuninitialized by default for >>> now -- the compiler doesn't always get it right") has never been >>> changed. :-) >>> >>> It is probably time to re-enable that warning after 13 years, at least. >> >> It probably only wants enabling for clang. GCC (at least, GCC 4.2.1) >> performs this analysis based on analyses run by the optimisers and so the >> warnings are dependent on optimisation level. >> >> David > > Hi, > > Is someone working on this?I was going to chime in and claim that I had seen false positives from -Wuninitialized even from recent clang, but upon consulting my build logs, it seems that the false positives are actually from -Wconditional-uninitialized. Is that known to be less reliable? -Ben _______________________________________________ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-stable-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"
On Tuesday, July 15, 2014 5:25:50 am Hans Petter Selasky wrote:> On 07/05/14 15:10, David Chisnall wrote: > > On 5 Jul 2014, at 14:07, Dimitry Andric <dim at FreeBSD.org> wrote: > > > >> Interestingly, -Wno-uninitialized has been in bsd.sys.mk since r76861, > >> and the accompanying comment ("XXX Delete -Wuninitialized by default for > >> now -- the compiler doesn't always get it right") has never been > >> changed. :-) > >> > >> It is probably time to re-enable that warning after 13 years, at least. > > > > It probably only wants enabling for clang. GCC (at least, GCC 4.2.1)performs this analysis based on analyses run by the optimisers and so the warnings are dependent on optimisation level.> > > > David > > Hi, > > Is someone working on this?If not, at least add a PR so it is harder to drop? -- John Baldwin