diff --git a/test/testconstructors.cpp b/test/testconstructors.cpp
index f247c47c7ac..1aaccce83d6 100644
--- a/test/testconstructors.cpp
+++ b/test/testconstructors.cpp
@@ -118,6 +118,7 @@ class TestConstructors : public TestFixture {
         TEST_CASE(initvar_derived_pod_struct_with_union); // #11101
 
         TEST_CASE(initvar_private_constructor);     // BUG 2354171 - private constructor
+        TEST_CASE(initvar_derived_private_constructor);
         TEST_CASE(initvar_copy_constructor); // ticket #1611
         TEST_CASE(initvar_nested_constructor); // ticket #1375
         TEST_CASE(initvar_nocopy1);            // ticket #2474
@@ -1609,6 +1610,15 @@ class TestConstructors : public TestFixture {
             ASSERT_EQUALS("", errout_str());
         }
     }
+    void initvar_derived_private_constructor() {
+        check("class B { int i; };\n"
+              "class D : B {\n"
+              "    explicit D(int) {}\n"
+              "};\n");
+        ASSERT_EQUALS("[test.cpp:1:1]: (style) The class 'B' does not declare a constructor although it has private member variables which likely require initialization. [noConstructor]\n"
+                      "[test.cpp:3:14]: (warning) Member variable 'B::i' is not initialized in the constructor. Maybe it should be initialized directly in the class B? [uninitDerivedMemberVarPrivate]\n",
+                      errout_str());
+    }
 
     void initvar_copy_constructor() { // ticket #1611
         check("class Fred\n"
diff --git a/test/testother.cpp b/test/testother.cpp
index 3f2af3c0f9a..6cb7a19d7b6 100644
--- a/test/testother.cpp
+++ b/test/testother.cpp
@@ -255,6 +255,8 @@ class TestOther : public TestFixture {
         TEST_CASE(raceAfterInterlockedDecrement);
 
         TEST_CASE(testUnusedLabel);
+        TEST_CASE(testUnusedLabelConfiguration);
+        TEST_CASE(testUnusedLabelSwitchConfiguration);
 
         TEST_CASE(testEvaluationOrder);
         TEST_CASE(testEvaluationOrderSelfAssignment);
@@ -11793,6 +11795,36 @@ class TestOther : public TestFixture {
         ASSERT_EQUALS("[test.cpp:6:5]: (style) Label 'label' is not used. [unusedLabel]\n", errout_str());
     }
 
+
+    void testUnusedLabelConfiguration() {
+        checkP("void f() {\n"
+               "#ifdef X\n"
+               "    goto END;\n"
+               "#endif\n"
+               "END:\n"
+               "}");
+        ASSERT_EQUALS("[test.cpp:5:1]: (style) Label 'END' is not used. There is #if in function body so the label might be used in code that is removed by the preprocessor. [unusedLabelConfiguration]\n",
+                      errout_str());
+    }
+
+    void testUnusedLabelSwitchConfiguration() {
+        checkP("void f(int i) {\n"
+               "    switch (i) {\n"
+               "    default:\n"
+               "        break;\n"
+               "#ifdef X\n"
+               "    case 1:\n"
+               "        goto END;\n"
+               "#endif\n"
+               "    case 2:\n"
+               "    END:\n"
+               "        return;\n"
+               "    }\n"
+               "}");
+        ASSERT_EQUALS("[test.cpp:10:5]: (warning) Label 'END' is not used. There is #if in function body so the label might be used in code that is removed by the preprocessor. Should this be a 'case' of the enclosing switch()? [unusedLabelSwitchConfiguration]\n",
+                      errout_str());
+    }
+
     // TODO: only used in a single place
 #define checkCustomSettings(...) checkCustomSettings_(__FILE__, __LINE__, __VA_ARGS__)
     template<size_t size>