On Sat, Apr 18, 2020 at 11:41 AM Randy Dunlap <rdun...@infradead.org> wrote:
>
> Fix gcc empty-body warning when -Wextra is used:
Please don't do this.
First off, "do_empty()" adds nothing but confusion. Now it
syntactically looks like it does something, and it's a new pattern to
everybody. I've never seen it before.
Secondly, even if we were to do this, then the patch would be wrong:
> if (cmpxchg(p, ACL_NOT_CACHED, sentinel) != ACL_NOT_CACHED)
> - /* fall through */ ;
> + do_empty(); /* fall through */
That comment made little sense before, but it makes _no_ sense now.
What fall-through? I'm guessing it meant to say "nothing", and
somebody was confused. With "do_empty()", it's even more confusing.
Thirdly, there's a *reason* why "-Wextra" isn't used.
The warnings enabled by -Wextra are usually complete garbage, and
trying to fix them often makes the code worse. Exactly like here.
Linus
_______________________________________________
Linux-nvdimm mailing list -- linux-nvdimm@lists.01.org
To unsubscribe send an email to linux-nvdimm-le...@lists.01.org
