On Tue, Oct 15, 2024 at 12:26:04PM -0700, Nathan Chancellor wrote: > On Tue, Oct 15, 2024 at 11:28:26AM -0700, Dmitry Torokhov wrote: > > Oh well, if our toolchain does not like "unreachable()" then we can > > simply remove it - the switch does cover all possible values and the > > "return" statement should be valid even if compiler somehow decides that > > "switch" statement can be skipped. > > > > If you can send a patch that would be great. > > Done, thanks a lot for the input! > > https://lore.kernel.org/20241015-hid-fix-fetch_item-unreachable-v1-1-b131cd10dbd1@xxxxxxxxxx/ There also is -funreachable-traps, which the kernel might want to use (with that option every builtin_unreachablei() is compiled to a trap instruction, instead of that the compiler just thinks "Aha! This can never happen!", and optimise based on that). Segher
