From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:60980) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1gkYAU-0004hj-PS for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 18 Jan 2019 12:42:59 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1gkYAS-0005QW-Mw for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 18 Jan 2019 12:42:58 -0500 Received: from mail-oi1-x229.google.com ([2607:f8b0:4864:20::229]:34985) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1gkYAQ-0005LG-Nl for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 18 Jan 2019 12:42:55 -0500 Received: by mail-oi1-x229.google.com with SMTP id v6so9615509oif.2 for ; Fri, 18 Jan 2019 09:42:53 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20190117132703.17790-1-alex.bennee@linaro.org> <20190117183002.GA21582@flamenco> <20190117200805.GA14264@flamenco> <87va2lyibo.fsf@linaro.org> In-Reply-To: <87va2lyibo.fsf@linaro.org> From: Peter Maydell Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2019 17:42:41 +0000 Message-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PULL 0/7] check-softfloat, fp-bench and clang compile fixes List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: =?UTF-8?B?QWxleCBCZW5uw6ll?= Cc: "Emilio G. Cota" , QEMU Developers On Fri, 18 Jan 2019 at 17:41, Alex Benn=C3=A9e wro= te: > > > Emilio G. Cota writes: > > > On Thu, Jan 17, 2019 at 18:55:33 +0000, Peter Maydell wrote: > >> configure has logic to check whether it can use particular > >> warning enable/disable flags. Newer gcc (and I hope clang > >> but forget) will happily silently allow -Wno-random-new-thing > >> even if they don't support -Wrandom-new-thing) but I'm not > >> sure our minimum compiler version is yet new enough to > >> be able to rely on that (indeed the warning messages suggest > >> it is not). > > > > I figured that -Wno-unitialized is documented to work on both > > gcc and clang, and the change in testfloat drops the need > > for no-discarded-qualifiers, so we can go with this without > > messing with configure. > > Works for me, OK with you Peter? If it builds on all the build machines it's ok. If it doesn't I'll bounce the pullreq and you can figure out a different approach :-) thanks -- PMM