* Linus Torvalds <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 28, 2016 at 12:03 PM, Linus Torvalds
> <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > Once we get to the point that the warning is no longer useful, and is more
> > pain than gain, it gets disabled.
>
> Btw, I have a suspicion that you didn't realize that "-Wmaybe-uninitialized"
> is
> separate from "-Wuninitialized" (which is *not* disabled).
I very much know the difference, as you can see from the commit IDs I cited.
> The "maybe-uninitialized" warning is literally gcc saying "I haven't really
> followed all the logic, but from my broken understanding it isn't _obvious_
> that
> it is initialized".
>
> And the problem is that a lot of gcc optimization choices basically move the
> pointer of "obvious". So the warning is a bit random to begin with. And when
> the
> gcc people screw thigns up, things go to hell in a handbasket.
Fair enough.
Thanks,
Ingo
