On Thu, Nov 03, 2016 at 12:58:55PM +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 03, 2016 at 12:51:15PM +0100, Bernd Schmidt wrote:
> > I'm concerned about the number of false positives for this warning, and
> > judging by previous discussions, I'm not alone in this. This patch limits it
> > to level 1 (any comment before the case label disables the warning) for
> > cases where the user specified no explicit level. It'll still generate
> > enough noise that people will be aware of it and can choose whether to use a
> > higher level or not.
> >
> > Bootstrapped and tested on x86_64-linux. Ok?
>
> I disagree, I'm ok with changing it to 2, but 1 is too much.
Same here. I'd support the level 2.
Marek
