On 19/07/19 13:51, Peter Maydell wrote:
>> I haven't looked closely at the code but I would guess that the
>> fallthrough is intended, because the default label has an "ot == MO_16"
>> condition.
> Yeah, this code is really weird -- if TARGET_X86_64 then
> MO_16 falls through into MO_32, but if
On Fri, 19 Jul 2019 at 12:45, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>
> On 19/07/19 13:23, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé wrote:
> > Reported by GCC9 when building with CFLAG -Wimplicit-fallthrough=2:
> >
> > CC target/i386/translate.o
> > target/i386/translate.c: In function ‘gen_shiftd_rm_T1’:
> >
On 19/07/19 13:23, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé wrote:
> Reported by GCC9 when building with CFLAG -Wimplicit-fallthrough=2:
>
> CC target/i386/translate.o
> target/i386/translate.c: In function ‘gen_shiftd_rm_T1’:
> target/i386/translate.c:1785:12: error: this statement may fall through
Reported by GCC9 when building with CFLAG -Wimplicit-fallthrough=2:
CC target/i386/translate.o
target/i386/translate.c: In function ‘gen_shiftd_rm_T1’:
target/i386/translate.c:1785:12: error: this statement may fall through
[-Werror=implicit-fallthrough=]
1785 | if
