From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <hubicka@kam.mff.cuni.cz>
Received: from akamas.troja.mff.cuni.cz (akamas.n.mff.cuni.cz [195.113.16.19])
 by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B32C13858018;
 Mon, 24 Jan 2022 18:54:18 +0000 (GMT)
DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.1 sourceware.org B32C13858018
Received: from nikam.ms.mff.cuni.cz (nikam.kam.mff.cuni.cz [195.113.17.177])
 (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)
 key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits))
 (No client certificate requested)
 by akamas.troja.mff.cuni.cz (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 54E2A4004D;
 Mon, 24 Jan 2022 19:54:16 +0100 (CET)
Received: by nikam.ms.mff.cuni.cz (Postfix, from userid 16202)
 id 504DE2802E9; Mon, 24 Jan 2022 19:54:16 +0100 (CET)
Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2022 19:54:16 +0100
From: Jan Hubicka <hubicka@kam.mff.cuni.cz>
To: "msebor at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
Cc: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: Re: [Bug tree-optimization/104203] [12 Regressions] huge
 compile-time regression since r12-6606-g9d6a0f388eb048f8
Message-ID: <Ye712NRLtEkkqlth@kam.mff.cuni.cz>
References: <bug-104203-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
 <bug-104203-4-7LEFxfZn3R@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <bug-104203-4-7LEFxfZn3R@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.7 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00, DKIM_SIGNED,
 DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU, KAM_NUMSUBJECT, SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_NONE,
 TXREP autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on
 server2.sourceware.org
X-BeenThere: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Gcc-bugs mailing list <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://gcc.gnu.org/mailman/options/gcc-bugs>,
 <mailto:gcc-bugs-request@gcc.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-request@gcc.gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://gcc.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gcc-bugs>,
 <mailto:gcc-bugs-request@gcc.gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2022 18:54:20 -0000

> > bool
> Since the pass issues a bunch other warnings (e.g., -Wstringop-overflow,
> -Wuse-after-free, etc.) the gate doesn't seem right.  But since #pragma GCC
> diagnostic can re-enable warnings disabled by -w (or turn them into errors) any
> gate that considers the global option setting will also interfere with that.

What the gate is executed the flags are set according to cfun, so you
can just combine all warning options for warnings issued by the pass
into the gate.