Re: [PATCH] news: Update release notes

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Thu, Mar 01, 2018 at 03:40:01PM +0100, Michal Privoznik wrote:
> On 03/01/2018 03:29 PM, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote:
> > On Thu, Mar 01, 2018 at 03:12:39PM +0100, Michal Privoznik wrote:
> >> On 03/01/2018 02:15 PM, Peter Krempa wrote:
> >>> On Thu, Mar 01, 2018 at 14:08:29 +0100, Michal Privoznik wrote:
> >>>> Signed-off-by: --help <mprivozn@xxxxxxxxxx>
> >>>
> >>> Hmm.
> >>>
> >>>> ---
> >>>>  docs/news.xml | 102 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> >>>>  1 file changed, 102 insertions(+)
> >>>>
> 
> 
> >>>> +      <change>
> >>>> +        <summary>
> >>>> +          src: Enable building with GCC 8.0
> >>>> +        </summary>
> >>>> +        <description>
> >>>> +          GCC 8.0 added more warnings which found some genuine problems with our code.
> >>>> +        </description>
> >>>
> >>> I'm not sure whether that improved anything. Also wasn't that gcc 7?
> >>
> >> It added a lot of cases into our switches which are now safer. The
> >> problem with enums in switch() statements is we have to be 100% sure
> >> value fits into the enum. For instance:
> >>
> >> int x = VIR_DOMAIN_DEVICE_LAST + 1;
> >>
> >> switch ((virDomainDeviceType) x) {
> >>   ...
> >> }
> >>
> >> is obviously problematic.
> >> And no, it's gcc 8.
> > 
> > Well yes & no. GCC complained about cases where we fell-through case:
> > statements, due to us not including enough cases. This caused me to
> > notice the more general problem with us not handling enum values which
> > didn't correspond to named constants.
> > 
> > So the general addition of case/default everywhere was not specifically
> > required by gcc 8. It is just something I chose todo to make us more
> > robust after realizing the implications of what gcc8 identified. The
> > warning flags we use to validate this have existed in ancient gcc versions.
> 
> Looks like Peter has opinion on this too. So should I leave this item
> out or reword it?

Do we usually document when we just fix compiler warnings ?  I'd just
personally leave out, or just say "Fixed some compiler warnings that
appear with GCC 8" and leave it at that.


Regards,
Daniel
-- 
|: https://berrange.com      -o-    https://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange :|
|: https://libvirt.org         -o-            https://fstop138.berrange.com :|
|: https://entangle-photo.org    -o-    https://www.instagram.com/dberrange :|

--
libvir-list mailing list
libvir-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list




[Index of Archives]     [Virt Tools]     [Libvirt Users]     [Lib OS Info]     [Fedora Users]     [Fedora Desktop]     [Fedora SELinux]     [Big List of Linux Books]     [Yosemite News]     [KDE Users]     [Fedora Tools]

  Powered by Linux