This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the glibc project.
Re: [PATCHv2] sysdeps/ieee754/soft-fp: ignore maybe-uninitialized with -O [BZ #19444]
- From: Joseph Myers <joseph at codesourcery dot com>
- To: Martin Jansa <martin dot jansa at gmail dot com>
- Cc: <libc-alpha at sourceware dot org>
- Date: Mon, 1 Oct 2018 15:03:12 +0000
- Subject: Re: [PATCHv2] sysdeps/ieee754/soft-fp: ignore maybe-uninitialized with -O [BZ #19444]
- References: <alpine.DEB.email@example.com> <20180930155305.19266-1-Martin.Jansa@gmail.com> <alpine.DEB.firstname.lastname@example.org> <20180930174859.GH1449@jama>
On Sun, 30 Sep 2018, Martin Jansa wrote:
> On Sun, Sep 30, 2018 at 04:53:36PM +0000, Joseph Myers wrote:
> > On Sun, 30 Sep 2018, Martin Jansa wrote:
> > > +#include <libc-diag.h>
> > > +/* R_f are not set in cases where it is not used in packing, but the
> > > + compiler does not see that it is set in all cases where it is
> > > + used, resulting in warnings that it may be used uninitialized.
> > > + The location of the warning differs in different versions of GCC,
> > > + it may be where R is defined using a macro or it may be where the
> > > + macro is defined. */
> > This comment is missing the key information that it's specifically a
> > warning seen with -O1.
> The other 3 cases of the same:
> are probably also triggered only with -O1, do you want me to update all
> 4 or just the new case?
They're definitely not limited to -O1 (or weren't when added in 2015,
commit dc6b5aed1b406a53c4512d355376b4e12c7da971). So it's only the new
case for which a comment about being limited to -O1 is appropriate.
Joseph S. Myers