Date: Sat, 30 Nov 2013 20:26:18 -0800 From: Peter Wemm <peter@wemm.org> To: Adrian Chadd <adrian@freebsd.org> Cc: Konstantin Belousov <kostikbel@gmail.com>, Dimitry Andric <dim@freebsd.org>, "current@freebsd.org" <current@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: RFC: (Unconditionally) enable -fno-strict-overflow for kernel builds Message-ID: <CAGE5yCovP17txufd6mfAPUk%2B2WiLMnCis=zQN6bZ25qp=DJ2Ng@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <CAJ-VmonQip5Q%2BDfSd_dba_=g8bZYM9uyhYw8XmhU4wGydnJJtg@mail.gmail.com> References: <20131130135616.GA59496@kib.kiev.ua> <E3E2524B-4423-4962-BFD7-9A81424296F7@FreeBSD.org> <CAJ-VmonQip5Q%2BDfSd_dba_=g8bZYM9uyhYw8XmhU4wGydnJJtg@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sat, Nov 30, 2013 at 4:33 PM, Adrian Chadd <adrian@freebsd.org> wrote: [..] > Are you able to have clang/llvm/gcc tell us where/when code is relying > on undefined behaviour? So we can, like, fix them? It wasn't all that long ago that we had this wonderful thing called -Werror and had a clean kernel build. The problem is that gcc and clang have different warning sets. I seem to recall we had -Werror on for gcc and off for clang. IMHO it would be more useful to do it the other way around. -- Peter Wemm - peter@wemm.org; peter@FreeBSD.org; peter@yahoo-inc.com; KI6FJV UTF-8: for when a ' just won\342\200\231t do.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CAGE5yCovP17txufd6mfAPUk%2B2WiLMnCis=zQN6bZ25qp=DJ2Ng>