public inbox for gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Dominik Vogt <vogt@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
Cc: Andreas Krebbel <krebbel@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	       Stefan Liebler <STLI@de.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Fix "#pragma GCC pop_options" warning.
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2015 13:31:00 -0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20151013133116.GA31947@linux.vnet.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <561CF8F5.3000402@redhat.com>

On Tue, Oct 13, 2015 at 02:28:37PM +0200, Bernd Schmidt wrote:
> On 10/13/2015 02:02 PM, Dominik Vogt wrote:
> >When "#pragma GCC pop_options" is used on a platform without
> >support for "#pragma GCC target", Gcc emits a warning.  As
> >pop_options is useful on targets without the target pragma to
> >restore optimizations flags, the warning should be removed.
> >
> >The attached patch does that rather inelegantly by checking if the
> >pragma_parse hook points to the default implementation.  I could't
> >think of a similarly terse but less clumsy way.  Suggestions for a
> >better test are very welcome.
> 
> Why not just remove the code that emits the warning message? Are
> there situations where the warning is justified?

Removing the warning would also affect "#pragma GCC target("foo")
But then, "#pragma GCC asdfg" doesn't produce a warning either, so
what's the point warning about an undefined "target" pragma, but
not about other undefined pragmas.  For me, either way to do this
is good.

By the way, the background is that Glibc used pop_options and the
warning broke building with -Werror (they have solved that in a
different way now).

Ciao

Dominik ^_^  ^_^

-- 

Dominik Vogt
IBM Germany

  reply	other threads:[~2015-10-13 13:31 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2015-10-13 12:02 Dominik Vogt
2015-10-13 12:28 ` Bernd Schmidt
2015-10-13 13:31   ` Dominik Vogt [this message]
2015-10-13 14:33     ` Bernd Schmidt
2015-10-13 15:03       ` Dominik Vogt
2015-10-13 15:05         ` Bernd Schmidt

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20151013133116.GA31947@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --to=vogt@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --cc=STLI@de.ibm.com \
    --cc=gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org \
    --cc=krebbel@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).