Re: [PATCH 1/2] Remove noreturn function pointers in usage.c

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

 



On Thu, Jun 9, 2011 at 8:31 AM, Andi Kleen <andi@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 09, 2011 at 01:52:24AM -0400, Jeff King wrote:
>> On Thu, Jun 09, 2011 at 06:59:15AM +0200, Andi Kleen wrote:
>>
>> > >  - Potential impact to people who do not use Gcc 4.6 with profile feedback
>> > >    is not explained away well, except for "Doesn't seem to make any
>> > >    difference."
>> >
>> > I merely went by "there are no new warnings" (I assume that's the main
>> > motivation)
>>
>> On your compiler and settings, perhaps. With your patch I get:
>>
>>   usage.c: In function ‘die’:
>>   usage.c:70:1: error: ‘noreturn’ function does return [-Werror]
>
> Ok.  Hmm, all I can say it compiled here.
>
> Ok then we have to remove it. I didn't really like Junio's approach
> to only do it for a single file because that would break with LTO / link
> time optimization which requires declarations to match between
> translation units.

Junio's approach didn't do it for a single file, it disabled the
NORETURN mechanism all together, by having a Makefile-switch.

> BTW 4.6.2 or so will have the problem fixed.

If it's only in 4.6 through 4.6.2, then we probably don't even need a
Makefile-switch for junio's approach at all; just checking the GCC
version should be reliable enough, no?
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html


[Index of Archives]     [Linux Kernel Development]     [Gcc Help]     [IETF Annouce]     [DCCP]     [Netdev]     [Networking]     [Security]     [V4L]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux SCSI]     [Fedora Users]