[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [PATCH 1/9] target/i386: silence the compiler warnings in gen_shiftd
From: |
Thomas Huth |
Subject: |
Re: [PATCH 1/9] target/i386: silence the compiler warnings in gen_shiftd_rm_T1 |
Date: |
Wed, 28 Oct 2020 13:57:30 +0100 |
User-agent: |
Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.6.0 |
On 28/10/2020 05.18, Chen Qun wrote:
> The current "#ifdef TARGET_X86_64" statement affects
> the compiler's determination of fall through.
>
> When using -Wimplicit-fallthrough in our CFLAGS, the compiler showed warning:
> target/i386/translate.c: In function ‘gen_shiftd_rm_T1’:
> target/i386/translate.c:1773:12: warning: this statement may fall through
> [-Wimplicit-fallthrough=]
> if (is_right) {
> ^
> target/i386/translate.c:1782:5: note: here
> case MO_32:
> ^~~~
>
> Reported-by: Euler Robot <euler.robot@huawei.com>
> Signed-off-by: Chen Qun <kuhn.chenqun@huawei.com>
> ---
> Cc: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
> Cc: Richard Henderson <richard.henderson@linaro.org>
> Cc: Eduardo Habkost <ehabkost@redhat.com>
> ---
> target/i386/translate.c | 4 ++--
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/target/i386/translate.c b/target/i386/translate.c
> index caea6f5fb1..4c353427d7 100644
> --- a/target/i386/translate.c
> +++ b/target/i386/translate.c
> @@ -1777,9 +1777,9 @@ static void gen_shiftd_rm_T1(DisasContext *s, MemOp ot,
> int op1,
> } else {
> tcg_gen_deposit_tl(s->T1, s->T0, s->T1, 16, 16);
> }
> - /* FALLTHRU */
> -#ifdef TARGET_X86_64
> + /* fall through */
> case MO_32:
> +#ifdef TARGET_X86_64
> /* Concatenate the two 32-bit values and use a 64-bit shift. */
> tcg_gen_subi_tl(s->tmp0, count, 1);
> if (is_right) {
The whole code here looks a little bit fishy to me ... in case TARGET_X86_64
is defined, the MO_16 code falls through to MO_32 ... but in case it is not
defined, it falls through to the default case that comes after the #ifdef
block? Is this really the right thing here? If so, I think there should be
some additional comments explaining this behavior.
Richard, maybe you could help to judge what is right here...?
Thomas
- [PATCH 6/9] target/sparc/win_helper: silence the compiler warnings, (continued)
[PATCH 1/9] target/i386: silence the compiler warnings in gen_shiftd_rm_T1, Chen Qun, 2020/10/28
- Re: [PATCH 1/9] target/i386: silence the compiler warnings in gen_shiftd_rm_T1,
Thomas Huth <=
Re: [PATCH 1/9] target/i386: silence the compiler warnings in gen_shiftd_rm_T1, Richard Henderson, 2020/10/28
[PATCH 4/9] linux-user/mips/cpu_loop: silence the compiler warnings, Chen Qun, 2020/10/28
[PATCH 8/9] target/ppc: silence the compiler warnings, Chen Qun, 2020/10/28