linux-mips
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: MIPS: Fix build error with modern GCC for non-Cavium.

To: Ralf Baechle <ralf@linux-mips.org>
Subject: Re: MIPS: Fix build error with modern GCC for non-Cavium.
From: "Maciej W. Rozycki" <macro@linux-mips.org>
Date: Sat, 15 Sep 2012 23:42:23 +0100 (BST)
Cc: linux-mips@linux-mips.org
In-reply-to: <20120910171157.GC24448@linux-mips.org>
List-archive: <http://www.linux-mips.org/archives/linux-mips/>
List-help: <mailto:ecartis@linux-mips.org?Subject=help>
List-id: linux-mips <linux-mips.eddie.linux-mips.org>
List-owner: <mailto:ralf@linux-mips.org>
List-post: <mailto:linux-mips@linux-mips.org>
List-software: Ecartis version 1.0.0
List-subscribe: <mailto:ecartis@linux-mips.org?subject=subscribe%20linux-mips>
List-unsubscribe: <mailto:ecartis@linux-mips.org?subject=unsubscribe%20linux-mips>
References: <S1903390Ab2IDU16/20120904202758Z+1425@eddie.linux-mips.org> <alpine.LFD.2.00.1209082024560.8926@eddie.linux-mips.org> <20120910171157.GC24448@linux-mips.org>
Sender: linux-mips-bounce@linux-mips.org
User-agent: Alpine 2.00 (LFD 1167 2008-08-23)
On Mon, 10 Sep 2012, Ralf Baechle wrote:

> >  A dummy "break" is the usual solution though.  I don't think GCC ever 
> > complains if it sees it unreachable after a "return" -- in a sense it is 
> > just as unreachable as this null instruction is.
> 
> I wasn't overly picky.  Whatever gets the stuff to build correctly.  I'm
> doing one final round of test builds over all -stable branches before
> dropping most of them like radioctive rocks.  But more on that later.

 Yeah, sure -- I just noted this is not breaking a new ground really.  
There was a time GCC used to support genuinely empty switch cases and that 
was removed at one point for better ISO C compliance.  There was a rush 
fixing code all over the place at that point, including some "proper" GNU 
software such as I reckon bison, and the common approach taken was that I 
referred to.

  Maciej

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>