From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 84559 invoked by alias); 26 Feb 2015 19:41:36 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-owner@sourceware.org Received: (qmail 84546 invoked by uid 89); 26 Feb 2015 19:41:35 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=2.6 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,FREEMAIL_FROM,KAM_FROM_URIBL_PCCC,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,SPF_PASS autolearn=no version=3.3.2 X-HELO: mail-ie0-f171.google.com Received: from mail-ie0-f171.google.com (HELO mail-ie0-f171.google.com) (209.85.223.171) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with (AES128-GCM-SHA256 encrypted) ESMTPS; Thu, 26 Feb 2015 19:41:34 +0000 Received: by iecat20 with SMTP id at20so20005242iec.12 for ; Thu, 26 Feb 2015 11:41:32 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.50.4.40 with SMTP id h8mr36778814igh.34.1424979692269; Thu, 26 Feb 2015 11:41:32 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.107.136.80 with HTTP; Thu, 26 Feb 2015 11:41:32 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: <54EEF2D4.2000602@redhat.com> Date: Thu, 26 Feb 2015 19:59:00 -0000 Message-ID: Subject: Re: many unused function warnings in gdb 7.9 on darwin From: Jack Howarth To: Pedro Alves Cc: "gdb@sourceware.org" Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2015-02/txt/msg00073.txt.bz2 The clang developers have comments on this issue in http://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=22712#c1. They ask (as I did originally) why we aren't wrapping these functions to keep them from being declared on darwin if they aren't used. On Thu, Feb 26, 2015 at 11:26 AM, Jack Howarth wrote: > Filed http://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=22712 on this issue. > Jack > > On Thu, Feb 26, 2015 at 5:17 AM, Pedro Alves wrote: >> On 02/24/2015 04:33 PM, Jack Howarth wrote: >>> Building the gdb 7.9 release on x86_64-apple-darwin14 produces many >>> warnings of the form... >>> >>> remote.c:2567:1: warning: unused function >>> 'VEC_thread_item_t_embedded_size' [-Wunused-function] >>> DEF_VEC_O(thread_item_t); >>> ^ >>> ./common/vec.h:435:20: note: expanded from macro 'DEF_VEC_O' >>> VEC_T(T); \ >>> ^ >>> ./common/vec.h:863:22: note: expanded from macro '\ >>> DEF_VEC_FUNC_O' >>> static inline size_t VEC_OP (T,embedded_size) \ >>> ^ >>> ./common/vec.h:399:22: note: expanded from macro 'VEC_OP' >>> #define VEC_OP(T,OP) VEC_##T##_##OP >>> ^ >>> :55:1: note: expanded from here >>> VEC_thread_item_t_embedded_size >>> ^ >>> >>> Shouldn't those VEC declarations use a wrapper to avoid them on >>> targets not supporting that code? >> >> AFAIK, -Wunused-function is supposed to be suppressed for >> "static inline" functions: >> >> -Wunused-function >> Warn whenever a static function is declared but not defined >> or a non-inline static function is unused. This warning is >> enabled by -Wall. >> >> Looks like a clang bug here? >> >> (I suspect marking the function with attribute used would >> work around this.) >> >> Thanks, >> Pedro Alves >>