On Fri, Apr 30, 2010 at 11:50 AM, Stefan Reinauer stepan@coresystems.de wrote:
On 4/30/10 7:13 PM, Myles Watson wrote:
As of 5512, these are the last four warnings that are not "defined but not used" warnings.
What's your impression... should we activate -Wno-unused ? or should we attempt to fix them?
I don't think it's worth activating -Wno-unused-functions untill we activate -Werror, but I think we should do that soon so that we don't reintroduce a lot of warnings.
I'd like to go drop all / most of the #ifdef UNUSED_CODE segments from coreboot over time, making it easier to follow the code that is actually there.
I agree.
Most of the existing warnings are amd k8 / fam10 warnings... and it's kind of tricky to understand why one board does init different than another one. Why don't all boards use " wait_all_aps_started" and / or " wait_all_core0_started" and / or "allow_all_aps_stop"? I think the unused messages show that we have too much unnecessary diversity here (aka rank growth)
Yes. There are definitely some things that need to be standardized, and the warnings are good at pointing that out, as you've said.
src/northbridge/amd/gx2/chipsetinit.c:271: warning: suggest parentheses around '-' inside '<<'
This would need help from someone with a GX2 (or willing to check out the data sheets ;-)
src/northbridge/amd/lx/raminit.c:334: warning: array subscript is above array bounds
Marc indicated, this could be a compiler "problem". We could maybe add an explicit check for the array index.
It looks like it's being indexed by a function that's built into the compiler that returns bit positions. Since the return value could be up to 31, I think it's a correct warning (the array's only got 8 elements.)
src/northbridge/via/vx800/pci_rawops.h:43:2: warning: #warning "FIXME: get rid of this extra copy of pci access functions."
Gone with 5513
src/southbridge/intel/pxhd/pxhd_bridge.c:70:2: warning: #warning "Please review lots of dead code here."
Gone with 5514
It's much nicer to have so many fewer warnings!
Thanks, Myles