On 09/07/2020 12.51, Stefan Hajnoczi wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 09, 2020 at 07:34:56AM +0200, Thomas Huth wrote:
>> diff --git a/util/coroutine-ucontext.c b/util/coroutine-ucontext.c
>> index f0b66320e1..a4e6446ed9 100644
>> --- a/util/coroutine-ucontext.c
>> +++ b/util/coroutine-ucontext.c
>> @@ -237,19
On Thu, Jul 09, 2020 at 07:34:56AM +0200, Thomas Huth wrote:
> diff --git a/util/coroutine-ucontext.c b/util/coroutine-ucontext.c
> index f0b66320e1..a4e6446ed9 100644
> --- a/util/coroutine-ucontext.c
> +++ b/util/coroutine-ucontext.c
> @@ -237,19 +237,15 @@ Coroutine *qemu_coroutine_new(void)
>
On 09/07/20 07:34, Thomas Huth wrote:
> GCC supports "#pragma GCC diagnostic" since version 4.6, and
> Clang seems to support it, too, since its early versions 3.x.
> That means that our minimum required compiler versions all support
> this pragma already and we can remove the test from configure a
On Thu, Jul 09, 2020 at 07:34:56AM +0200, Thomas Huth wrote:
> GCC supports "#pragma GCC diagnostic" since version 4.6, and
> Clang seems to support it, too, since its early versions 3.x.
> That means that our minimum required compiler versions all support
> this pragma already and we can remove th
GCC supports "#pragma GCC diagnostic" since version 4.6, and
Clang seems to support it, too, since its early versions 3.x.
That means that our minimum required compiler versions all support
this pragma already and we can remove the test from configure and
all the related #ifdefs in the code.
Signe
