On Wed, 5 Mar 2025 19:00:49 GMT, Harshitha Onkar <hon...@openjdk.org> wrote:
>> Harfbuzz upgraded to v10.4.0 >> >> File changes - >> >> **Newly added files** >> >> libharfbuzz/OT/Var/VARC/VARC.hh >> libharfbuzz/OT/Var/VARC/coord-setter.hh >> libharfbuzz/hb-decycler.hh >> libharfbuzz/hb-geometry.hh >> libharfbuzz/hb-ot-var-varc-table.hh >> libharfbuzz/hb-subset-instancer-iup.hh >> libharfbuzz/hb-subset-serialize.h >> >> >> **Deleted** >> >> libharfbuzz/OT/glyf/VarCompositeGlyph.hh >> libharfbuzz/OT/glyf/coord-setter.hh >> >> >> **Modified: 182 existing files modified** >> >> To prevent build failures due to dangling pointer (on linux) it has been >> added to HARFBUZZ_DISABLED_WARNINGS_gcc in >> [ClientLibraries.gmk](https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/pull/23910/files#diff-cd8423c7b5d9fc65d6553ebfd4c3721218c74f9bdb6a1039cc4e6fee8267cd13) > > src/java.desktop/share/native/libharfbuzz/hb.hh line 134: > >> 132: #pragma GCC diagnostic ignored "-Wcast-function-type-strict" // >> https://github.com/harfbuzz/harfbuzz/pull/3859#issuecomment-1295409126 >> 133: #pragma GCC diagnostic ignored "-Wdangling-reference" // >> https://github.com/harfbuzz/harfbuzz/issues/4043 >> 134: #pragma GCC diagnostic ignored "-Wdangling-pointer" // Trigerred by >> hb_decycler_node_t(). > > @prrace With the latest harfbuzz (v10.4.0), dangling-pointer warning is > ignored. With this addition, I assumed that we no longer need to add it to > harfbuzz warning section explicitly. > > But without adding dangling-pointer to `HARFBUZZ_DISABLED_WARNINGS_gcc` build > fails on linux so probably JDK build requires warnings to be explicitly added > to ClientLibraries.gmk ? > > > decycler.hh:110:25: error: storing the address of local variable > ‘decycler_node' > in '((hb_decycler_t*)((char*)scratch + 8))[1].hb_decycler_t::tortoise' > [-Werror=dangling-pointer=] > 110 | decycler.tortoise = decycler.hare = this; > | ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Interesting. I also would have expected this to over-ride the JDK default. But if that's what you see ... A bit of googling suggests that sometimes these pragmas are read too late. ------------- PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/23910#discussion_r1982127430
