[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20240517095110.GAZkcojmJQoY_zU-OT@fat_crate.local>
Date: Fri, 17 May 2024 11:51:10 +0200
From: Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
To: Nathan Chancellor <nathan@...nel.org>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>, x86@...nel.org,
Bill Wendling <morbo@...gle.com>,
Justin Stitt <justinstitt@...gle.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
llvm@...ts.linux.dev, patches@...ts.linux.dev,
kernel test robot <lkp@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86/boot: Address clang -Wimplicit-fallthrough in
vsprintf()
On Thu, May 16, 2024 at 07:03:41AM -0700, Nathan Chancellor wrote:
> After enabling -Wimplicit-fallthrough for the x86 boot code, clang
> warns:
>
> arch/x86/boot/printf.c:257:3: warning: unannotated fall-through between switch labels [-Wimplicit-fallthrough]
> 257 | case 'u':
> | ^
>
> Clang is a little more pedantic than GCC, which does not warn when
> falling through to a case that is just break or return.
Is anyone fixing Clang?
:-P
--
Regards/Gruss,
Boris.
https://people.kernel.org/tglx/notes-about-netiquette
Powered by blists - more mailing lists