From: Nathan Chancellor [mailto:natechancel...@gmail.com] > Sent: 04 September 2019 01:24 > On Tue, Sep 03, 2019 at 02:31:28PM -0500, Segher Boessenkool wrote: > > On Mon, Sep 02, 2019 at 10:55:53PM -0700, Nathan Chancellor wrote: > > > On Thu, Aug 29, 2019 at 09:59:48AM +0000, David Laight wrote: > > > > From: Nathan Chancellor > > > > > Sent: 28 August 2019 19:45 > > > > ... > > > > > However, I think that -fno-builtin-* would be appropriate here because > > > > > we are providing our own setjmp implementation, meaning clang should > > > > > not > > > > > be trying to do anything with the builtin implementation like > > > > > building a > > > > > declaration for it. > > > > > > > > Isn't implementing setjmp impossible unless you tell the compiler that > > > > you function is 'setjmp-like' ? > > > > > > No idea, PowerPC is the only architecture that does such a thing. > > > > Since setjmp can return more than once, yes, exciting things can happen > > if you do not tell the compiler about this. > > > > > > Segher > > > > Fair enough so I guess we are back to just outright disabling the > warning.
Just disabling the warning won't stop the compiler generating code that breaks a 'user' implementation of setjmp(). David - Registered Address Lakeside, Bramley Road, Mount Farm, Milton Keynes, MK1 1PT, UK Registration No: 1397386 (Wales)