[issue23545] Turn on extra warnings on GCC

[Martin Panter]

Martin Panter added the comment:

I think Silent Ghost is talking about my -Wtype-limits warning, which is still 
present. That is the only warning I am getting. I suspect you won’t see it with 
a 32-bit build.

--

___
Python tracker 

___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com

[issue23545] Turn on extra warnings on GCC

[Stefan Krah]

Stefan Krah added the comment:

Agreed. SilentGhost, it's probably best to open new issues for the warnings.

--

___
Python tracker 

___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com

[issue23545] Turn on extra warnings on GCC

[Roundup Robot]

Roundup Robot added the comment:

New changeset da485c6c744e by Stefan Krah in branch 'default':
Issue #23545: Adding -Wextra in setup.py is no longer necessary, since it
https://hg.python.org/cpython/rev/da485c6c744e

--

___
Python tracker 

___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com

[issue23545] Turn on extra warnings on GCC

[Serhiy Storchaka]

Serhiy Storchaka added the comment:

All warnings were resolved at the moment of providing previous version, but the 
code was changed too much last days. New warnings was added and disappeared in 
these days. Now we can just sit and resolve the leftover.

--

___
Python tracker 

___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com

[issue23545] Turn on extra warnings on GCC

[SilentGhost]

SilentGhost added the comment:

The commit didn't resolve the warning though.

--
nosy: +SilentGhost

___
Python tracker 

___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com

[issue23545] Turn on extra warnings on GCC

[Serhiy Storchaka]

Serhiy Storchaka added the comment:

AFAIK $CFLAGS_NODIST is used only for compiling the core and standard modules, 
$OPT is included in $CFLAGS and also used for compiling third-party extensions. 
Since -Wall is already included in $OPT, there is no need of it in 
$CFLAGS_NODIST. Removed this part. Thank you for your review Martin.

--
resolution:  -> fixed
stage: patch review -> resolved
status: open -> closed

___
Python tracker 

___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com

[issue23545] Turn on extra warnings on GCC

[Roundup Robot]

Roundup Robot added the comment:

New changeset 99adb5df8cb6 by Serhiy Storchaka in branch 'default':
Issue #23545: Turn on extra warnings on GCC.
https://hg.python.org/cpython/rev/99adb5df8cb6

--
nosy: +python-dev

___
Python tracker 

___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com

[issue23545] Turn on extra warnings on GCC

[Martin Panter]

Martin Panter added the comment:

Can one of the -Wall flags be dropped? What is the difference between $OPT and 
$CFLAGS_NODIST?

gcc -pthread -c -Wno-unused-result -Wsign-compare -DNDEBUG -g -fwrapv -O3 -Wall 
-Wstrict-prototypes-std=c99 -Wall -Wextra -Wno-unused-result 
-Wno-unused-parameter -Wno-missing-field-initializers   -I. -IInclude 
-I./Include-DPy_BUILD_CORE -o Programs/python.o ./Programs/python.c

--

___
Python tracker 

___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com

[issue23545] Turn on extra warnings on GCC

[Serhiy Storchaka]

Serhiy Storchaka added the comment:

Rebased patch. Removed save_CFLAGS="$CFLAGS" and CFLAGS="$save_CFLAGS" lines as 
Marin suggested.

Benjamin, seems you are experienced with autoconf. Could you please make a 
review?

--
Added file: http://bugs.python.org/file44512/configure_extra_warnings2.patch

___
Python tracker 

___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com

[issue23545] Turn on extra warnings on GCC

[Serhiy Storchaka]

Changes by Serhiy Storchaka :


--
nosy: +benjamin.peterson

___
Python tracker 

___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com

[issue23545] Turn on extra warnings on GCC

[Antti Haapala]

Antti Haapala added the comment:

Ah, indeed, I somehow missed that. Though, there is no good reason for it being 
unsigned either; as the actual type in SSL API's is of type int. Another 
argument of type int is cast to unsigned just for the comparison on line 4419, 
and unsigned int counters i and j are used in function _setup_ssl_threads.

The variable could be safely changed to `size_t` (along with those index 
variables) without it affecting anything at all, as it is a static variable 
within that module and only used to hold a size of an array, and never passed 
back to another function.

--

___
Python tracker 

___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com

[issue23545] Turn on extra warnings on GCC

[Serhiy Storchaka]

Serhiy Storchaka added the comment:

Seems GCC is such smart, that can deduce that the maximal value of 
_ssl_locks_count is never larger than PY_SSIZE_T_MAX / 
sizeof(PyThread_type_lock). The other workaround is making _ssl_locks_count of 
type size_t instead of unsigned int, but I wouldn't do this with good reasons.

--

___
Python tracker 

___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com

[issue23545] Turn on extra warnings on GCC

[Martin Panter]

Martin Panter added the comment:

I didn’t look too closely, but I did see that _ssl_locks_count is unsigned int. 
I was compiling for x86-64 Linux, where int is 32 bits and size_t is 64. So 
maybe GCC was optimizing the (size_t) cast away, and then rightfully warning 
that the largest unsigned int will never exceed the largest possible array size.

--

___
Python tracker 

___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com

[issue23545] Turn on extra warnings on GCC

[Antti Haapala]

Antti Haapala added the comment:

I don't think adding -Wno-type-limits is a good idea.

The good question is how that can be happening, e.g. how PY_SSIZE_T_MAX divided 
by sizeof anything can be *more* than max(size_t)? E.g now that I stare at the 
code, *that* warning should be impossible if everything is correct. It means 
either that the RHS is negative or size_t is defined to be 32-bit in this 
compilation unit whereas PY_SSIZE_T is 64-bit. Neither sound like a good idea.

--
nosy: +ztane

___
Python tracker 

___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com

[issue23545] Turn on extra warnings on GCC

[Serhiy Storchaka]

Serhiy Storchaka added the comment:

Just add -Wno-type-limits.

--

___
Python tracker 

___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com

[issue23545] Turn on extra warnings on GCC

[Martin Panter]

Martin Panter added the comment:

The proposed options add exactly one warning for me (ignoring warnings from 
libffi). How would you work around this:

./Include/pymem.h:136:18: warning: comparison is always false due to limited 
range of data type [-Wtype-limits]
   ( ((size_t)(n) > PY_SSIZE_T_MAX / sizeof(type)) ? NULL : \
  ^
/media/disk/home/proj/python/cpython/Modules/_ssl.c:4435:22: note: in expansion 
of macro ‘PyMem_New’
 _ssl_locks = PyMem_New(PyThread_type_lock, _ssl_locks_count);
  ^

--

___
Python tracker 

___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com

[issue23545] Turn on extra warnings on GCC

[Martin Panter]

Martin Panter added the comment:

-Wall is already added (unconditionally) to $OPT above. What’s the point of 
also adding it to $CFLAGS_NODIST as well? Does it have to be added to both?

--
nosy: +martin.panter

___
Python tracker 

___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com

[issue23545] Turn on extra warnings on GCC

[STINNER Victor]

Changes by STINNER Victor :


--
nosy: +haypo

___
Python tracker 

___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com

[issue23545] Turn on extra warnings on GCC

[Serhiy Storchaka]

Serhiy Storchaka added the comment:

Could anyone please make a review?

--
versions: +Python 3.6 -Python 3.5

___
Python tracker 

___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com

[issue23545] Turn on extra warnings on GCC

[Serhiy Storchaka]

Serhiy Storchaka added the comment:

I'm not well experienced with autoconf. Here is my attempt.

--
keywords: +patch
stage:  - patch review
Added file: http://bugs.python.org/file38547/configure_extra_warnings.patch

___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue23545
___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com

[issue23545] Turn on extra warnings on GCC

[Stefan Krah]

Stefan Krah added the comment:

+1. I think the flags should go into CFLAGS_NODIST.

--
nosy: +skrah

___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue23545
___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com

[issue23545] Turn on extra warnings on GCC

[Serhiy Storchaka]

New submission from Serhiy Storchaka:

What if make GCC emit extra warnings? Adding following options:

-Wall -Wextra -Wno-unused-result -Wno-unused-parameter 
-Wno-missing-field-initializers

will make GCC emit all warnings except few types that would produce too many 
warnings. With these options the compilation is almost clean on 32-bit Linux.

--
components: Build
messages: 236851
nosy: serhiy.storchaka
priority: normal
severity: normal
status: open
title: Turn on extra warnings on GCC
type: enhancement
versions: Python 3.5

___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue23545
___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com