|
Date: Fri, 4 Apr 2014 16:47:01 -0400 From: Rich Felker <dalias@...ifal.cx> To: musl@...ts.openwall.com Subject: Re: build with clang-3.4 warnings report On Fri, Apr 04, 2014 at 09:59:22PM +0200, Abdoulaye Walsimou Gaye wrote: > src/aio/aio_readwrite.c:20:16: warning: initializer overrides prior initialization of this subobject [-Winitializer-overrides] > .__si_fields.__sigchld.si_pid = __pthread_self()->pid, > ~^~~~~~~~~ > src/aio/aio_readwrite.c:18:20: note: previous initialization is here > .__si_fields.__rt.si_sigval = sev->sigev_value, > ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > 1 warning generated. This looks like an actual bug. If these two members overlap, we can't store both. > src/ctype/towctrans.c:239:3: warning: add explicit braces to avoid dangling else [-Wdangling-else] > else return wc + 0x2d00 - 0x10a0; > ^ > src/ctype/towctrans.c:242:3: warning: add explicit braces to avoid dangling else [-Wdangling-else] > else return wc + 0x10a0 - 0x2d00; > ^ > 2 warnings generated. Bogus, so this looks like one we should disable from configure. > In file included from src/errno/strerror.c:7: > src/errno/__strerror.h:100:1: warning: implicit conversion from 'int' to 'unsigned char' changes value from 1133 to 109 [-Wconstant-conversion] > 1133, > ^~~~ > 1 warning generated. I thought this was fixed (and only on mips). The conversion in the current source is not implicit but explicit. > src/internal/shgetc.c:16:15: warning: '&&' within '||' [-Wlogical-op-parentheses] > if (f->shlim && f->shcnt >= f->shlim || (c=__uflow(f)) < 0) { > ~~~~~~~~~^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~ > src/internal/shgetc.c:16:15: note: place parentheses around the '&&' expression to silence this warning > if (f->shlim && f->shcnt >= f->shlim || (c=__uflow(f)) < 0) { > ^ > ( ) > 1 warning generated. Bogus. > In file included from src/ipc/semtimedop.c:2: > In file included from ./include/sys/sem.h:28: > ../include/endian.h:32:25: warning: '&' within '|' [-Wbitwise-op-parentheses] > return __x>>24 | __x>>8&0xff00 | __x<<8&0xff0000 | __x<<24; > ~ ~~~~~~^~~~~~~ > ../include/endian.h:32:25: note: place parentheses around the '&' expression to silence this warning > return __x>>24 | __x>>8&0xff00 | __x<<8&0xff0000 | __x<<24; > ^ > ( ) > ../include/endian.h:32:41: warning: '&' within '|' [-Wbitwise-op-parentheses] > return __x>>24 | __x>>8&0xff00 | __x<<8&0xff0000 | __x<<24; > ~ ~~~~~~^~~~~~~~~ > ../include/endian.h:32:41: note: place parentheses around the '&' expression to silence this warning > return __x>>24 | __x>>8&0xff00 | __x<<8&0xff0000 | __x<<24; > ^ > ( ) > ../include/endian.h:37:23: warning: operator '<<' has lower precedence than '+'; '+' will be evaluated first [-Wshift-op-parentheses] > return __bswap32(__x)+0ULL<<32 | __bswap32(__x>>32); > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~^~~~~~~ > ../include/endian.h:37:23: note: place parentheses around the '+' expression to silence this warning > return __bswap32(__x)+0ULL<<32 | __bswap32(__x>>32); > ^ > ( ) > 3 warnings generated. Another bogus one. Does -Wno-parentheses fail to silence these? > src/locale/iconv.c:323:7: warning: adding 'unsigned int' to a string does not append to the string [-Wstring-plus-int] > +c%256}, &(size_t){4}, > ^~~~~~ > src/locale/iconv.c:323:7: note: use array indexing to silence this warning > +c%256}, &(size_t){4}, > ^ Another bogus one. > src/math/fma.c:334:15: warning: pragma STDC FENV_ACCESS ON is not supported, ignoring pragma [-Wunknown-pragmas] > #pragma STDC FENV_ACCESS ON > ^ > 1 warning generated. We have -Wno-unknown-pragmas... so why is this appearing? > src/regex/regcomp.c:2659:24: warning: equality comparison with extraneous parentheses [-Wparentheses-equality] > if (((lit)->code_min == -4)) > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~^~~~~ > src/regex/regcomp.c:2659:24: note: remove extraneous parentheses around the comparison to silence this warning > if (((lit)->code_min == -4)) > ~ ^ ~ > src/regex/regcomp.c:2659:24: note: use '=' to turn this equality comparison into an assignment > if (((lit)->code_min == -4)) > ^~ > = > 1 warning generated. Another one, but these parens could be removed. I think they're a leftover from removing other conditions in the same if statement. > src/time/localtime_r.c:9:9: warning: comparison of constant -67908586910515200 with expression of type 'const time_t' (aka 'const long') is always false [-Wtautological-constant-out-of-range-compare] > if (*t < (-1-0x7fffffff) * 31622400LL || *t > 0x7fffffff * 31622400LL) { > ~~ ^ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > src/time/localtime_r.c:9:46: warning: comparison of constant 67908586878892800 with expression of type 'const time_t' (aka 'const long') is always false [-Wtautological-constant-out-of-range-compare] > if (*t < (-1-0x7fffffff) * 31622400LL || *t > 0x7fffffff * 31622400LL) { > ~~ ^ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > 2 warnings generated. More bogus. It's not tautological; it's arch-specific whether it can be true or not. The second half of the email was all duplicates from the shared library build. Rich
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use? Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia and check out these guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.