On Sat, Aug 12, 2023, at 11:21, Masahiro Yamada wrote:
> On Sat, Aug 12, 2023 at 5:50 PM Arnd Bergmann <arnd@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> GCC manual says -Wall implies -Wmaybe-uninitialized.
>
> If you move -Wno-maybe-uninitialize to the "W != 2" part,
> -Wmaybe-uninitialized is unneeded in the 'W == 2" part.
>
> Maybe, the same applies to -Wunused-but-set-parameter.
>
> Shall we drop warnings implied by another, or
> is it clearer to explicitly add either -Wfoo or -Wno-foo?
>
> If desired, we can do such a clean-up later, though.
Right, we can probably drop that, I've gone back and forth
on this how to handle these. Some of the warnings are
handled differently between gcc and clang, or differently
between compiler versions, where they are sometimes
implied and sometimes need to be specified explicitly.
What I've tried to do here is to do the change in the least
invasive way to ensure that this larger patch does not
change the behavior. My preference would be for you
to merge it like this unless you see a bug, and then
do another cleanup pass where we remove the ones implied
by either -Wall or -Wextra on all known versions.
I'll be on vacation the next few weeks starting on
Tuesday and will be able to reply to emails, but won't
have a chance to sufficiently test any significant
reworks of my series before the merge window.
Arnd
