[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <24087aa311e84df3a3df3c0e15151580@AcuMS.aculab.com>
Date: Mon, 15 Aug 2022 09:55:50 +0000
From: David Laight <David.Laight@...LAB.COM>
To: 'Nick Desaulniers' <ndesaulniers@...gle.com>,
Nathan Chancellor <nathan@...nel.org>
CC: Codrin Ciubotariu <codrin.ciubotariu@...rochip.com>,
Liam Girdwood <lgirdwood@...il.com>,
Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>,
Nicolas Ferre <nicolas.ferre@...rochip.com>,
Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@...tlin.com>,
Claudiu Beznea <claudiu.beznea@...rochip.com>,
Tom Rix <trix@...hat.com>,
"alsa-devel@...a-project.org" <alsa-devel@...a-project.org>,
"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org"
<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"llvm@...ts.linux.dev" <llvm@...ts.linux.dev>
Subject: RE: [PATCH] ASoC: mchp-spdiftx: Fix clang
-Wbitfield-constant-conversion
From: Nick Desaulniers
> Sent: 10 August 2022 22:14
>
> On Tue, Aug 9, 2022 at 6:08 PM Nathan Chancellor <nathan@...nel.org> wrote:
> >
> > A recent change in clang strengthened its -Wbitfield-constant-conversion
> > to warn when 1 is assigned to a 1-bit signed integer bitfield, as it can
> > only be 0 or -1, not 1:
Is there a -Wsigned-bitfield ?
You probably don't ever want the compiler to be generating
the code to sign-propagate a bitfield.
David
-
Registered Address Lakeside, Bramley Road, Mount Farm, Milton Keynes, MK1 1PT, UK
Registration No: 1397386 (Wales)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists