Messages in this thread | | | From | Linus Torvalds <> | Date | Fri, 16 Jul 2021 12:26:27 -0700 | Subject | Re: [GIT PULL] fallthrough fixes for Clang for 5.14-rc2 |
| |
On Fri, Jul 16, 2021 at 12:18 PM Nathan Chancellor <nathan@kernel.org> wrote: > > Hence why I suggested -Wimplicit-fallthrough-unreachable.
As long as it's a warning that the kernel would never set, that's fine.
I think it's an entirely bogus warning, but at some point as long as we don't need to care about it, we can happily ignore it.
Or just continue to say "clang is spewing bogus warnings, don't use it".
But the sane naming for that warning should certainly not have anything at all to do with "implicit". Quite the reverse. The warning is about an _explicit_ fallthrough being unreachable, and as such thje warning name should reflect that.
So make it just "-Wfallthrough-unreachable" (maybe even "-Wexplicit-..") to allow people who want that pointless warning to enable it.
Linus
| |