Fix Clang bug that -Wformat-signedness is not reported properly. #150962

DeanSturtevant1 · 2025-07-28T14:39:30Z

The goal is to correctly identify diagnostics that are emitted by virtue of -Wformat-signedness.

Before this change, diagnostic messages triggered by -Wformat-signedness might look like:
format specifies type 'unsigned int' but the argument has type 'int' [-Wformat]
signedness of format specifier 'u' is incompatible with 'c' [-Wformat]
With this change:
format specifies type 'unsigned int' but the argument has type 'int', which differs in signedness [-Wformat-signedness]
signedness of format specifier 'u' is incompatible with 'c' [-Wformat-signedness]

Fix:

handleFormatSignedness can now return NoMatchSignedness. Callers handle this.
warn_format_conversion_argument_type extends the message it used to emit by a string that
mentions "signedness".
warn_format_cmp_specifier_sign_mismatch is now correctly categorized as a
diagnostic controlled by -Wformat-signedness.

The goal is to correctly identify diagnostics that are emitted by virtue of -Wformat-signedness. Before this change, diagnostic messages triggered by -Wformat-signedness might look like: format specifies type 'unsigned int' but the argument has type 'int' [-Wformat] signedness of format specifier 'u' is incompatible with 'c' [-Wformat] With this change: format specifies type 'unsigned int' but the argument has type 'int', which differs in signedness [-Wformat-signedness] signedness of format specifier 'u' is incompatible with 'c' [-Wformat-signedness] Fix: - handleFormatSignedness can now return NoMatchSignedness. Callers handle this. - warn_format_conversion_argument_type extends the message it used to emit by a string that mentions "signedness". - warn_format_cmp_specifier_sign_mismatch is now correctly categorized as a diagnostic controlled by -Wformat-signedness.

llvmbot · 2025-07-28T14:40:09Z

@llvm/pr-subscribers-clang

Author: None (DeanSturtevant1)

Changes

The goal is to correctly identify diagnostics that are emitted by virtue of -Wformat-signedness.

Before this change, diagnostic messages triggered by -Wformat-signedness might look like:
format specifies type 'unsigned int' but the argument has type 'int' [-Wformat]
signedness of format specifier 'u' is incompatible with 'c' [-Wformat]
With this change:
format specifies type 'unsigned int' but the argument has type 'int', which differs in signedness [-Wformat-signedness]
signedness of format specifier 'u' is incompatible with 'c' [-Wformat-signedness]

Fix:

handleFormatSignedness can now return NoMatchSignedness. Callers handle this.
warn_format_conversion_argument_type extends the message it used to emit by a string that
mentions "signedness".
warn_format_cmp_specifier_sign_mismatch is now correctly categorized as a
diagnostic controlled by -Wformat-signedness.

Full diff: https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/150962.diff

3 Files Affected:

(modified) clang/include/clang/Basic/DiagnosticSemaKinds.td (+9-5)
(modified) clang/lib/Sema/SemaChecking.cpp (+23-18)
(modified) clang/test/Sema/format-strings-signedness.c (+30-30)

diff --git a/clang/include/clang/Basic/DiagnosticSemaKinds.td b/clang/include/clang/Basic/DiagnosticSemaKinds.td
index da4216dbda4c9..752ce93190d37 100644
--- a/clang/include/clang/Basic/DiagnosticSemaKinds.td
+++ b/clang/include/clang/Basic/DiagnosticSemaKinds.td
@@ -10398,9 +10398,11 @@ def warn_format_conversion_argument_type_mismatch : Warning<
 def warn_format_conversion_argument_type_mismatch_pedantic : Extension<
   warn_format_conversion_argument_type_mismatch.Summary>,
   InGroup<FormatPedantic>;
-def warn_format_conversion_argument_type_mismatch_signedness : Warning<
-  warn_format_conversion_argument_type_mismatch.Summary>,
-  InGroup<FormatSignedness>, DefaultIgnore;
+def warn_format_conversion_argument_type_mismatch_signedness
+    : Warning<warn_format_conversion_argument_type_mismatch.Summary>,
+      "format specifies type %0 but the argument has %select{type|underlying "
+      "type}2 %1, which differs in signedness" >
+    , InGroup<FormatSignedness>, DefaultIgnore;
 def warn_format_conversion_argument_type_mismatch_confusion : Warning<
   warn_format_conversion_argument_type_mismatch.Summary>,
   InGroup<FormatTypeConfusion>, DefaultIgnore;
@@ -10512,8 +10514,10 @@ def warn_format_cmp_sensitivity_mismatch : Warning<
   "it should be %select{unspecified|private|public|sensitive}1">, InGroup<Format>;
 def warn_format_cmp_specifier_mismatch : Warning<
   "format specifier '%0' is incompatible with '%1'">, InGroup<Format>;
-def warn_format_cmp_specifier_sign_mismatch : Warning<
-  "signedness of format specifier '%0' is incompatible with '%1'">, InGroup<Format>;
+def warn_format_cmp_specifier_sign_mismatch
+    : Warning<"signedness of format specifier '%0' is incompatible with '%1'">,
+      InGroup<FormatSignedness>,
+      DefaultIgnore;
 def warn_format_cmp_specifier_mismatch_pedantic : Extension<
   warn_format_cmp_specifier_sign_mismatch.Summary>, InGroup<FormatPedantic>;
 def note_format_cmp_with : Note<
diff --git a/clang/lib/Sema/SemaChecking.cpp b/clang/lib/Sema/SemaChecking.cpp
index c74b67106ad74..a9584f8273406 100644
--- a/clang/lib/Sema/SemaChecking.cpp
+++ b/clang/lib/Sema/SemaChecking.cpp
@@ -40,6 +40,7 @@
 #include "clang/AST/UnresolvedSet.h"
 #include "clang/Basic/AddressSpaces.h"
 #include "clang/Basic/Diagnostic.h"
+#include "clang/Basic/DiagnosticSema.h"
 #include "clang/Basic/IdentifierTable.h"
 #include "clang/Basic/LLVM.h"
 #include "clang/Basic/LangOptions.h"
@@ -7645,17 +7646,13 @@ bool EquatableFormatArgument::VerifyCompatible(
     break;
 
   case MK::NoMatchSignedness:
-    if (!S.getDiagnostics().isIgnored(
-            diag::warn_format_conversion_argument_type_mismatch_signedness,
-            ElementLoc)) {
-      EmitDiagnostic(S,
-                     S.PDiag(diag::warn_format_cmp_specifier_sign_mismatch)
-                         << buildFormatSpecifier()
-                         << Other.buildFormatSpecifier(),
-                     FmtExpr, InFunctionCall);
-      HadError = S.Diag(Other.ElementLoc, diag::note_format_cmp_with)
-                 << 0 << Other.Range;
-    }
+    EmitDiagnostic(S,
+                   S.PDiag(diag::warn_format_cmp_specifier_sign_mismatch)
+                       << buildFormatSpecifier()
+                       << Other.buildFormatSpecifier(),
+                   FmtExpr, InFunctionCall);
+    HadError = S.Diag(Other.ElementLoc, diag::note_format_cmp_with)
+               << 0 << Other.Range;
     break;
   }
   return !HadError;
@@ -8189,11 +8186,14 @@ static analyze_format_string::ArgType::MatchKind
 handleFormatSignedness(analyze_format_string::ArgType::MatchKind Match,
                        DiagnosticsEngine &Diags, SourceLocation Loc) {
   if (Match == analyze_format_string::ArgType::NoMatchSignedness) {
-    Match =
+    if (Diags.isIgnored(
+            diag::warn_format_conversion_argument_type_mismatch_signedness,
+            Loc) ||
         Diags.isIgnored(
-            diag::warn_format_conversion_argument_type_mismatch_signedness, Loc)
-            ? analyze_format_string::ArgType::Match
-            : analyze_format_string::ArgType::NoMatch;
+            // Arbitrary -Wformat diagnostic to detect -Wno-format:
+            diag::warn_format_conversion_argument_type_mismatch, Loc)) {
+      return analyze_format_string::ArgType::Match;
+    }
   }
   return Match;
 }
@@ -8407,8 +8407,10 @@ CheckPrintfHandler::checkFormatExpr(const analyze_printf::PrintfSpecifier &FS,
       case ArgType::Match:
       case ArgType::MatchPromotion:
       case ArgType::NoMatchPromotionTypeConfusion:
-      case ArgType::NoMatchSignedness:
         llvm_unreachable("expected non-matching");
+      case ArgType::NoMatchSignedness:
+        Diag = diag::warn_format_conversion_argument_type_mismatch_signedness;
+        break;
       case ArgType::NoMatchPedantic:
         Diag = diag::warn_format_conversion_argument_type_mismatch_pedantic;
         break;
@@ -8733,9 +8735,10 @@ bool CheckScanfHandler::HandleScanfSpecifier(
   analyze_format_string::ArgType::MatchKind Match =
       AT.matchesType(S.Context, Ex->getType());
   Match = handleFormatSignedness(Match, S.getDiagnostics(), Ex->getExprLoc());
-  bool Pedantic = Match == analyze_format_string::ArgType::NoMatchPedantic;
   if (Match == analyze_format_string::ArgType::Match)
     return true;
+  bool Pedantic = Match == analyze_format_string::ArgType::NoMatchPedantic;
+  bool Signedness = Match == analyze_format_string::ArgType::NoMatchSignedness;
 
   ScanfSpecifier fixedFS = FS;
   bool Success = fixedFS.fixType(Ex->getType(), Ex->IgnoreImpCasts()->getType(),
@@ -8743,7 +8746,9 @@ bool CheckScanfHandler::HandleScanfSpecifier(
 
   unsigned Diag =
       Pedantic ? diag::warn_format_conversion_argument_type_mismatch_pedantic
-               : diag::warn_format_conversion_argument_type_mismatch;
+      : Signedness
+          ? diag::warn_format_conversion_argument_type_mismatch_signedness
+          : diag::warn_format_conversion_argument_type_mismatch;
 
   if (Success) {
     // Get the fix string from the fixed format specifier.
diff --git a/clang/test/Sema/format-strings-signedness.c b/clang/test/Sema/format-strings-signedness.c
index d5a8140d9ef8a..773ff412ac177 100644
--- a/clang/test/Sema/format-strings-signedness.c
+++ b/clang/test/Sema/format-strings-signedness.c
@@ -39,13 +39,13 @@ void test_printf_unsigned_char(unsigned char x)
 void test_printf_int(int x)
 {
     printf("%d", x); // no-warning
-    printf("%u", x); // expected-warning{{format specifies type 'unsigned int' but the argument has type 'int'}}
-    printf("%x", x); // expected-warning{{format specifies type 'unsigned int' but the argument has type 'int'}}
+    printf("%u", x); // expected-warning{{format specifies type 'unsigned int' but the argument has type 'int', which differs in signedness}}
+    printf("%x", x); // expected-warning{{format specifies type 'unsigned int' but the argument has type 'int', which differs in signedness}}
 }
 
 void test_printf_unsigned(unsigned x)
 {
-    printf("%d", x); // expected-warning{{format specifies type 'int' but the argument has type 'unsigned int'}}
+    printf("%d", x); // expected-warning{{format specifies type 'int' but the argument has type 'unsigned int', which differs in signedness}}
     printf("%u", x); // no-warning
     printf("%x", x); // no-warning
 }
@@ -53,13 +53,13 @@ void test_printf_unsigned(unsigned x)
 void test_printf_long(long x)
 {
     printf("%ld", x); // no-warning
-    printf("%lu", x); // expected-warning{{format specifies type 'unsigned long' but the argument has type 'long'}}
-    printf("%lx", x); // expected-warning{{format specifies type 'unsigned long' but the argument has type 'long'}}
+    printf("%lu", x); // expected-warning{{format specifies type 'unsigned long' but the argument has type 'long', which differs in signedness}}
+    printf("%lx", x); // expected-warning{{format specifies type 'unsigned long' but the argument has type 'long', which differs in signedness}}
 }
 
 void test_printf_unsigned_long(unsigned long x)
 {
-    printf("%ld", x); // expected-warning{{format specifies type 'long' but the argument has type 'unsigned long'}}
+    printf("%ld", x); // expected-warning{{format specifies type 'long' but the argument has type 'unsigned long', which differs in signedness}}
     printf("%lu", x); // no-warning
     printf("%lx", x); // no-warning
 }
@@ -67,13 +67,13 @@ void test_printf_unsigned_long(unsigned long x)
 void test_printf_long_long(long long x)
 {
     printf("%lld", x); // no-warning
-    printf("%llu", x); // expected-warning{{format specifies type 'unsigned long long' but the argument has type 'long long'}}
-    printf("%llx", x); // expected-warning{{format specifies type 'unsigned long long' but the argument has type 'long long'}}
+    printf("%llu", x); // expected-warning{{format specifies type 'unsigned long long' but the argument has type 'long long', which differs in signedness}}
+    printf("%llx", x); // expected-warning{{format specifies type 'unsigned long long' but the argument has type 'long long', which differs in signedness}}
 }
 
 void test_printf_unsigned_long_long(unsigned long long x)
 {
-    printf("%lld", x); // expected-warning{{format specifies type 'long long' but the argument has type 'unsigned long long'}}
+    printf("%lld", x); // expected-warning{{format specifies type 'long long' but the argument has type 'unsigned long long', which differs in signedness}}
     printf("%llu", x); // no-warning
     printf("%llx", x); // no-warning
 }
@@ -85,8 +85,8 @@ enum enum_int {
 void test_printf_enum_int(enum enum_int x)
 {
     printf("%d", x); // no-warning
-    printf("%u", x); // expected-warning{{format specifies type 'unsigned int' but the argument has underlying type 'int'}}
-    printf("%x", x); // expected-warning{{format specifies type 'unsigned int' but the argument has underlying type 'int'}}
+    printf("%u", x); // expected-warning{{format specifies type 'unsigned int' but the argument has underlying type 'int', which differs in signedness}}
+    printf("%x", x); // expected-warning{{format specifies type 'unsigned int' but the argument has underlying type 'int', which differs in signedness}}
 }
 
 #ifndef _WIN32 // Disabled due to enums have different underlying type on _WIN32
@@ -96,7 +96,7 @@ enum enum_unsigned {
 
 void test_printf_enum_unsigned(enum enum_unsigned x)
 {
-    printf("%d", x); // expected-warning{{format specifies type 'int' but the argument has underlying type 'unsigned int'}}
+    printf("%d", x); // expected-warning{{format specifies type 'int' but the argument has underlying type 'unsigned int', which differs in signedness}}
     printf("%u", x); // no-warning
     printf("%x", x); // no-warning
 }
@@ -110,8 +110,8 @@ enum enum_long {
 void test_printf_enum_long(enum enum_long x)
 {
     printf("%ld", x); // no-warning
-    printf("%lu", x); // expected-warning{{format specifies type 'unsigned long' but the argument has underlying type 'long'}}
-    printf("%lx", x); // expected-warning{{format specifies type 'unsigned long' but the argument has underlying type 'long'}}
+    printf("%lu", x); // expected-warning{{format specifies type 'unsigned long' but the argument has underlying type 'long', which differs in signedness}}
+    printf("%lx", x); // expected-warning{{format specifies type 'unsigned long' but the argument has underlying type 'long', which differs in signedness}}
 }
 
 enum enum_unsigned_long {
@@ -120,7 +120,7 @@ enum enum_unsigned_long {
 
 void test_printf_enum_unsigned_long(enum enum_unsigned_long x)
 {
-    printf("%ld", x); // expected-warning{{format specifies type 'long' but the argument has underlying type 'unsigned long'}}
+    printf("%ld", x); // expected-warning{{format specifies type 'long' but the argument has underlying type 'unsigned long', which differs in signedness}}
     printf("%lu", x); // no-warning
     printf("%lx", x); // no-warning
 }
@@ -136,61 +136,61 @@ void test_scanf_unsigned_char(unsigned char *y) {
 
 void test_scanf_int(int *x) {
   scanf("%d", x); // no-warning
-  scanf("%u", x); // expected-warning{{format specifies type 'unsigned int *' but the argument has type 'int *'}}
-  scanf("%x", x); // expected-warning{{format specifies type 'unsigned int *' but the argument has type 'int *'}}
+  scanf("%u", x); // expected-warning{{format specifies type 'unsigned int *' but the argument has type 'int *', which differs in signedness}}
+  scanf("%x", x); // expected-warning{{format specifies type 'unsigned int *' but the argument has type 'int *', which differs in signedness}}
 }
 
 void test_scanf_unsigned(unsigned *x) {
-  scanf("%d", x); // expected-warning{{format specifies type 'int *' but the argument has type 'unsigned int *'}}
+  scanf("%d", x); // expected-warning{{format specifies type 'int *' but the argument has type 'unsigned int *', which differs in signedness}}
   scanf("%u", x); // no-warning
   scanf("%x", x); // no-warning
 }
 
 void test_scanf_long(long *x) {
   scanf("%ld", x); // no-warning
-  scanf("%lu", x); // expected-warning{{format specifies type 'unsigned long *' but the argument has type 'long *'}}
-  scanf("%lx", x); // expected-warning{{format specifies type 'unsigned long *' but the argument has type 'long *'}}
+  scanf("%lu", x); // expected-warning{{format specifies type 'unsigned long *' but the argument has type 'long *', which differs in signedness}}
+  scanf("%lx", x); // expected-warning{{format specifies type 'unsigned long *' but the argument has type 'long *', which differs in signedness}}
 }
 
 void test_scanf_unsigned_long(unsigned long *x) {
-  scanf("%ld", x); // expected-warning{{format specifies type 'long *' but the argument has type 'unsigned long *'}}
+  scanf("%ld", x); // expected-warning{{format specifies type 'long *' but the argument has type 'unsigned long *', which differs in signedness}}
   scanf("%lu", x); // no-warning
   scanf("%lx", x); // no-warning
 }
 
 void test_scanf_longlong(long long *x) {
   scanf("%lld", x); // no-warning
-  scanf("%llu", x); // expected-warning{{format specifies type 'unsigned long long *' but the argument has type 'long long *'}}
-  scanf("%llx", x); // expected-warning{{format specifies type 'unsigned long long *' but the argument has type 'long long *'}}
+  scanf("%llu", x); // expected-warning{{format specifies type 'unsigned long long *' but the argument has type 'long long *', which differs in signedness}}
+  scanf("%llx", x); // expected-warning{{format specifies type 'unsigned long long *' but the argument has type 'long long *', which differs in signedness}}
 }
 
 void test_scanf_unsigned_longlong(unsigned long long *x) {
-  scanf("%lld", x); // expected-warning{{format specifies type 'long long *' but the argument has type 'unsigned long long *'}}
+  scanf("%lld", x); // expected-warning{{format specifies type 'long long *' but the argument has type 'unsigned long long *', which differs in signedness}}
   scanf("%llu", x); // no-warning
   scanf("%llx", x); // no-warning
 }
 
 void test_scanf_enum_int(enum enum_int *x) {
   scanf("%d", x); // no-warning
-  scanf("%u", x); // expected-warning{{format specifies type 'unsigned int *' but the argument has type 'enum enum_int *'}}
-  scanf("%x", x); // expected-warning{{format specifies type 'unsigned int *' but the argument has type 'enum enum_int *'}}
+  scanf("%u", x); // expected-warning{{format specifies type 'unsigned int *' but the argument has type 'enum enum_int *', which differs in signedness}}
+  scanf("%x", x); // expected-warning{{format specifies type 'unsigned int *' but the argument has type 'enum enum_int *', which differs in signedness}}
 }
 
 #ifndef _WIN32 // Disabled due to enums have different underlying type on _WIN32
 void test_scanf_enum_unsigned(enum enum_unsigned *x) {
-  scanf("%d", x); // expected-warning{{format specifies type 'int *' but the argument has type 'enum enum_unsigned *'}}
+  scanf("%d", x); // expected-warning{{format specifies type 'int *' but the argument has type 'enum enum_unsigned *', which differs in signedness}}
   scanf("%u", x); // no-warning
   scanf("%x", x); // no-warning
 }
 
 void test_scanf_enum_long(enum enum_long *x) {
   scanf("%ld", x); // no-warning
-  scanf("%lu", x); // expected-warning{{format specifies type 'unsigned long *' but the argument has type 'enum enum_long *'}}
-  scanf("%lx", x); // expected-warning{{format specifies type 'unsigned long *' but the argument has type 'enum enum_long *'}}
+  scanf("%lu", x); // expected-warning{{format specifies type 'unsigned long *' but the argument has type 'enum enum_long *', which differs in signedness}}
+  scanf("%lx", x); // expected-warning{{format specifies type 'unsigned long *' but the argument has type 'enum enum_long *', which differs in signedness}}
 }
 
 void test_scanf_enum_unsigned_long(enum enum_unsigned_long *x) {
-  scanf("%ld", x); // expected-warning{{format specifies type 'long *' but the argument has type 'enum enum_unsigned_long *'}}
+  scanf("%ld", x); // expected-warning{{format specifies type 'long *' but the argument has type 'enum enum_unsigned_long *', which differs in signedness}}
   scanf("%lu", x); // no-warning
   scanf("%lx", x); // no-warning
 }

DeanSturtevant1 · 2025-07-28T14:45:45Z

Fixing build ...

Beats me why.

DeanSturtevant1 · 2025-07-28T15:58:06Z

@AaronBallman,@karka228,@hazohelet -- would you care to review this pull request?
Thanks

Dean

DeanSturtevant1 · 2025-08-04T20:03:47Z

@AaronBallman,@karka228,@hazohelet - please - any thoughts?
Thanks.

Dean

shafik

This need a release note, that is in clang/docs/ReleaseNotes.txt

karka228 · 2025-08-05T08:35:55Z

First a general note. The reason why -Wformat-signedness is implemented a bit weird in clang is that we wanted the warning to be more or less compatible with how it is implemented in gcc. That way a user that change from gcc to clang (or use compile with both clang and gcc) don't run into any undesirable surprises.

The original discussion about gcc compatibility can be found in the original PR #74440

With that said, the clang implementation isn't entirely compatible with gcc and we can if we want introduce new incompatibilities if we find it reasonable.

I have only looked briefly on your patch and I think the added ", which differs in signedness" to the warning message is a good thing.

Merge branch 'main' of https://github.com/DeanSturtevant1/llvm-project

DeanSturtevant1 · 2025-08-05T14:02:55Z

Note that PR 74440 contains a review comment that the following property would be good:
"diagnostic text shows the name of the warning flag (in case you need to look it up or disable it)"
That being said, this change removes the gcc-compatible point 6 which is that the diagnostics are
associated with -Wformat. There was a remark about the strangeness of this, and it fact this
interferes with the accuracy of work I am doing to categorize warnings that might fire in my
company's codebase if enabled.

This change should in no way change under what conditions the diagnostics are emitted.

I included release notes. PTAL.

karka228 · 2025-08-05T21:03:13Z

Note that PR 74440 contains a review comment that the following property would be good: "diagnostic text shows the name of the warning flag (in case you need to look it up or disable it)" That being said, this change removes the gcc-compatible point 6 which is that the diagnostics are associated with -Wformat. There was a remark about the strangeness of this, and it fact this interferes with the accuracy of work I am doing to categorize warnings that might fire in my company's codebase if enabled.

I think we all agree that the way gcc implemented this from the beginning is strange and that implied that the implementation in clang also is strange. I think I leave this up to @AaronBallman to decide if the gcc-compatible in point 6 which is that the diagnostics are associated with -Wformat, discussed in the original PR 74440, is important or not.

karka228 · 2025-08-10T09:09:19Z

@AaronBallman Ping. Can you please take a look at how we should handle the gcc incompatible in the warning mention above. Is it fine to go ahead anyway?

DeanSturtevant1 · 2025-08-11T20:13:55Z

An explanation for why I wrote this pull request:
I am doing an exploration as to what warnings would be emitted and where if all warnings were enabled, categorized by diagnostic id (and its most proximate warning option). It was showing up an inexplicable number of warnings attributed to a "-Wformat" diagnostic. It was odd because -Wformat is enabled by default along with -Werror. I tracked it down to a misclassification by Clang that is being addressed by this pull request.
I suggest that the gcc behavior is not appropriate and rejecting it is probably the way to go.

DeanSturtevant1 added 2 commits July 28, 2025 10:30

clang-format

906679f

llvmbot added clang Clang issues not falling into any other category clang:frontend Language frontend issues, e.g. anything involving "Sema" labels Jul 28, 2025

Merge branch 'main' into main

787bfcb

DeanSturtevant1 added 3 commits July 28, 2025 10:50

Fix copy error.

2789319

Merge branch 'main' of https://github.com/DeanSturtevant1/llvm-project

8ea4c38

Beats me why.

Merge branch 'main' into main

23122d8

DeanSturtevant1 added 3 commits August 4, 2025 13:29

Merge branch 'main' into main

ca70dff

Merge branch 'main' into main

0dc2db6

Merge branch 'main' into main

2ae9b1d

shafik requested a review from karka228 August 5, 2025 00:00

shafik assigned AaronBallman and hazohelet and unassigned AaronBallman and hazohelet Aug 5, 2025

shafik requested review from AaronBallman and hazohelet August 5, 2025 00:01

shafik reviewed Aug 5, 2025

View reviewed changes

DeanSturtevant1 added 3 commits August 5, 2025 09:39

Add release notes for pull request llvm#150962,

0c5abf5

release notes

ef52e90

Merge branch 'main' of https://github.com/DeanSturtevant1/llvm-project

Merge branch 'llvm:main' into main

9423173

Merge branch 'llvm:main' into main

844bc92

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

Uh oh!

Fix Clang bug that -Wformat-signedness is not reported properly. #150962

Fix Clang bug that -Wformat-signedness is not reported properly. #150962

DeanSturtevant1 commented Jul 28, 2025

Uh oh!

llvmbot commented Jul 28, 2025

Uh oh!

DeanSturtevant1 commented Jul 28, 2025

Uh oh!

DeanSturtevant1 commented Jul 28, 2025

Uh oh!

DeanSturtevant1 commented Aug 4, 2025

Uh oh!

shafik left a comment

Uh oh!

karka228 commented Aug 5, 2025

Uh oh!

DeanSturtevant1 commented Aug 5, 2025

Uh oh!

karka228 commented Aug 5, 2025

Uh oh!

karka228 commented Aug 10, 2025

Uh oh!

DeanSturtevant1 commented Aug 11, 2025

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Fix Clang bug that -Wformat-signedness is not reported properly. #150962

Are you sure you want to change the base?

Fix Clang bug that -Wformat-signedness is not reported properly. #150962

Conversation

DeanSturtevant1 commented Jul 28, 2025

Uh oh!

llvmbot commented Jul 28, 2025

Uh oh!

DeanSturtevant1 commented Jul 28, 2025

Uh oh!

DeanSturtevant1 commented Jul 28, 2025

Uh oh!

DeanSturtevant1 commented Aug 4, 2025

Uh oh!

shafik left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

karka228 commented Aug 5, 2025

Uh oh!

DeanSturtevant1 commented Aug 5, 2025

Uh oh!

karka228 commented Aug 5, 2025

Uh oh!

karka228 commented Aug 10, 2025

Uh oh!

DeanSturtevant1 commented Aug 11, 2025

Uh oh!

Uh oh!