Matthew, Paul Bolle schreef op ma 24-03-2014 om 16:36 [+0100]: > On Mon, 2014-03-24 at 09:31 -0400, Matthew Wilcox wrote: > > I should try things myself before opening my big mouth. Weird. Using > > gcc-4.8, I see the same thing. Guess I should just apply the patch, > > though it feels wrong to be initialising an entire struct just to silence > > a bogus compiler warning :-( > > I noticed this difference on a 32 bit x86 machine and a 64 bit x86 > machine that are both running Fedora 20. They both should be at > gcc-4.8.2 for quite some time now (if I grepped the yum log correctly). > > Anyhow, the warning on 32 bit is rather noisy, so I wanted it gone. But > my comments should make clear I'm not really happy with this patch. > > And as this is now unlikely to be in time for v3.14, we might decide to > dig deeper. It won't be the first time that a rather small change (say, > converting a variable from signed to unsigned) turns out be enough to > make GCC understand the flow of the code.
This noisy warning is still seen when compiling v3.15-rc4 for x86 (32 bit, that is). Assuming this patch is not queued anywhere: is the unsophisticated approach of my v2 acceptable or would you like me to try and find the cause of this warning? Paul Bolle -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [email protected] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
