[Bridge] [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH 000/141] Fix fall-through warnings for Clang
fthain at telegraphics.com.au
Thu Nov 26 00:30:36 UTC 2020
On Wed, 25 Nov 2020, Nick Desaulniers wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 25, 2020 at 1:33 PM Finn Thain <fthain at telegraphics.com.au> wrote:
> > Or do you think that a codebase can somehow satisfy multiple checkers
> > and their divergent interpretations of the language spec?
> Have we found any cases yet that are divergent? I don't think so.
You mean, aside from -Wimplicit-fallthrough? I'm glad you asked. How about
-Wincompatible-pointer-types and -Wframe-larger-than?
All of the following files have been affected by divergent diagnostics
produced by clang and gcc.
And if I searched for 'smatch' or 'coverity' instead of 'clang' I'd
probably find more divergence.
Here are some of the relevant commits.
And before you object, "but -Wconstant-logical-operand is a clang-only
warning! it can't be divergent with gcc!", consider that the special cases
added to deal with clang-only warnings have to be removed when gcc catches
up, which is more churn. Now multiply that by the number of checkers you
More information about the Bridge