On Wed, 20 Jul 2022 14:18:49 GMT, Jorn Vernee <jver...@openjdk.org> wrote:
>> This patch enables lossy conversion warnings (C4244 [1]) for hotspot on >> Windows/MSVC. Instead of fixing all warnings that were produced from this, >> I've instead locally disabled the warning in the files that produced >> warnings. This allows gradually making progress with cleaning up these >> warnings on a per-file basis, instead of trying to fix all of them in one >> shot. i.e. it is not meant as a long term solution, but as a way of allowing >> incremental progress. >> >> Out of the ~1100 files that make up hotspot on Windows x64 , ~290 have >> warnings for them disabled (not counting aarch64 files), which means that >> with this patch ~800 files are protected by enabling this warning globally. >> >> Warnings can be fixed in individual files, or groups of files in followup >> patches, and warnings for those files can be enabled. >> >> I'm working on a patch that does the same for GCC, but it produces warnings >> in about 150 more files, so I wanted to gather feedback on this approach >> before continuing with that. >> >> --- >> >> To disable warnings for a file, in most cases the following prelude is added >> after the last `#include` at the start of a file: >> >> PRAGMA_DIAG_PUSH >> PRAGMA_ALLOW_LOSSY_CONVERSIONS >> >> And then the following is added at the end of the file for cpp files, or >> before closing the header guard for hpp files: >> >> PRAGMA_DIAG_POP >> >> 1 notable exception are files produced by adlc, which had their code-gen >> modified to add these lines instead. There were also 2 files that include >> headers in the middle of the file (ostream.cpp & sharedRuntime.cpp), for >> which I've added the PRAGMA's after the include block at the start of the >> file instead. They only included system headers, for which disabling >> warnings doesn't matter any ways. >> >> [1]: >> https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/cpp/error-messages/compiler-warnings/compiler-warning-levels-3-and-4-c4244?view=msvc-170 > > Jorn Vernee has updated the pull request with a new target base due to a > merge or a rebase. The pull request now contains 15 commits: > > - Merge branch 'master' into Warn_Narrow > - Polish pt2 > - Polish > - Remove PUSH POP from test files > - Remove PUSH POP from cpp files > - Rest of the tests > - More test > - AArch64 > - Disable for tests > - Fix apostrophe > - ... and 5 more: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/compare/1c055076...fb276afd So IIUC the idea here is to turn on this warning to catch lossy conversions going forward, but to suppress the warning on all existing cases in the hope that eventually one day they will get looked at and fixed as appropriate. Is this such an insidious problem that we absolutely must prevent any future occurrences from arising, noting that if they happen in a file already ignoring the warning then we won't notice anyway? To me this needs to be a first step in a well-defined and resourced plan to actually address these issues, not just the first step with a hope other steps will follow. Just my 2c. Cheers. ------------- PR: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/9516
