From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-patches-return-440975-listarch-gcc-patches=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: (qmail 83438 invoked by alias); 10 Nov 2016 16:24:59 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-patches-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-patches.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-patches-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-patches-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 83427 invoked by uid 89); 10 Nov 2016 16:24:58 -0000
Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none
X-Virus-Found: No
X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 spammy=
X-HELO: mx2.suse.de
Received: from mx2.suse.de (HELO mx2.suse.de) (195.135.220.15) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Thu, 10 Nov 2016 16:24:57 +0000
Received: from relay2.suse.de (charybdis-ext.suse.de [195.135.220.254])	by mx2.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 397FDAD4F;	Thu, 10 Nov 2016 16:24:55 +0000 (UTC)
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Introduce -fprofile-update=maybe-atomic
To: David Edelsohn <dje.gcc@gmail.com>
References: <87f2bc4f-c4df-eadd-aec6-a937ed0ccaba@acm.org> <67fda6d2-9b3e-a0d1-effc-34e1115030b2@acm.org> <b62f3336-b332-048f-ed2f-9392824f0b84@suse.cz> <1ff3cc75-7cee-79f3-395b-ef7a4d286a3d@acm.org> <04a05835-4666-4d7d-c1a9-d4bcc4ea924a@suse.cz> <ac9182f6-7164-9426-c55b-c13a1a30d3bd@suse.cz> <87k2fpdatl.fsf@tassilo.jf.intel.com> <6f8b1905-818b-bfff-1bf3-5ba04f3b4b64@suse.cz> <c526f177-0304-787d-c57d-3fd3e49a57e5@redhat.com> <20160818155130.GE5871@two.firstfloor.org> <631cf1bd-8ae9-f07b-5672-5084b699f650@redhat.com> <2c750f4c-c96c-2b22-43ae-53bbebf18af8@suse.cz> <73aa44d7-5287-e4b8-6188-a87d52d3d6b9@acm.org> <9aca1f7c-e7eb-e101-249e-8b5edd21cd48@suse.cz> <2419555f-7271-d64d-94ac-ac97ee7cb953@suse.cz> <4cbaad58-421d-cef5-e1b1-6c78a56d18b8@suse.cz> <5b7cdf6c-54e4-126b-1461-26f88b45dbbb@suse.cz> <36aaf074-5042-c4b9-8d47-9f52313765d6@acm.org> <8e2214bb-3944-7bc7-0d61-098f9f4cadae@suse.cz> <CAGWvnymzgMWzUzqKngQ89C-vaPMMp0R1PGs7xsXjnO0mLtPqkA@mail.gmail.com>
Cc: Nathan Sidwell <nathan@acm.org>, Jeff Law <law@redhat.com>, Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org>, GCC Patches <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>, Jan Hubicka <jh@suse.cz>
From: =?UTF-8?Q?Martin_Li=c5=a1ka?= <mliska@suse.cz>
Message-ID: <2442c0ca-fa36-30bc-1797-3f30fbd75030@suse.cz>
Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2016 16:24:00 -0000
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.4.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CAGWvnymzgMWzUzqKngQ89C-vaPMMp0R1PGs7xsXjnO0mLtPqkA@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-IsSubscribed: yes
X-SW-Source: 2016-11/txt/msg00961.txt.bz2

On 11/10/2016 05:17 PM, David Edelsohn wrote:
> Maybe instead of adding "maybe", we need to change the severity of the
> warning so that the warning is not emitted by default.

Adding the warning option to -Wextra can be solution. Is it acceptable
approach?

Martin