>>> On 11.04.17 at 09:54, <roger....@citrix.com> wrote:
> clang gcc-compat warnings can wrongly fire when certain constructions are
> used,
> at least the following flow:
>
> switch ( ... )
> {
> case ...:
> while ( ({ int x; switch ( foo ) { case 1: x = 1; break; } x }) )
> {
> ...
>
> Will cause clang to emit the following warning "'break' is bound to loop, GCC
> binds it to switch", which is a false positive, and both gcc and clang bound
bind (I think)
> the break to the inner switch. In order to workaround this issue, disable the
> gcc-compat checks for the usage of the read_atomic macro.
Hmm, so far it wasn't clear to me that this is also needing an outer
switch() - can you confirm switch inside the while control expression
alone does not trigger the warning?
> This has been reported upstream as
> http://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=32595.
>
> Signed-off-by: Roger Pau Monné <roger....@citrix.com>
The patch itself is fine with me, i.e.
Acked-by: Jan Beulich <jbeul...@suse.com>
but besides wanting to wait for above confirmation, I'd also like
to allow some time for others to voice objections to this new
approach.
Jan
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xen.org
https://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
