From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 39132 invoked by alias); 25 Mar 2016 16:16:22 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-patches-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-patches-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 39104 invoked by uid 89); 25 Mar 2016 16:16:21 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-2.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,SPF_HELO_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 spammy=holidays, him X-HELO: mx1.redhat.com Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with (AES256-GCM-SHA384 encrypted) ESMTPS; Fri, 25 Mar 2016 16:16:20 +0000 Received: from int-mx10.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx10.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.23]) by mx1.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8EC52804E6; Fri, 25 Mar 2016 16:16:19 +0000 (UTC) Received: from slagheap.utah.redhat.com (ovpn-113-52.phx2.redhat.com [10.3.113.52]) by int-mx10.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id u2PGGJ1J018587; Fri, 25 Mar 2016 12:16:19 -0400 Subject: Re: Fix 69650, bogus line numbers from libcpp To: Bernd Schmidt , Richard Biener References: <56E12FFF.6050800@t-online.de> <56E132FC.2030404@redhat.com> <1457734166.5425.43.camel@redhat.com> <56E6BAB1.6030804@redhat.com> <1458591323.9902.81.camel@redhat.com> <56F07CA0.5040607@redhat.com> <56F296D5.8050204@redhat.com> <56F405DB.1060600@redhat.com> <56F45B40.4080405@redhat.com> Cc: David Malcolm , GCC Patches From: Jeff Law Message-ID: <56F56452.2030501@redhat.com> Date: Fri, 25 Mar 2016 18:25:00 -0000 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.6.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <56F45B40.4080405@redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2016-03/txt/msg01418.txt.bz2 On 03/24/2016 03:25 PM, Jeff Law wrote: > On 03/24/2016 09:20 AM, Bernd Schmidt wrote: >> >> Like this? No one has yet approved any better wording for the message, >> so given that you said "it's not a regression" I've left it, but I would >> now prefer "linemarker ignored due to incorrect nesting". >> >> >> Bernd >> >> cpp-leave.diff >> >> >> PR lto/69650 >> * directives.c (do_linemarker): Test for file left but not entered >> here. >> * line-map.c (linemap_add): Not here. >> >> PR lto/69650 >> * gcc.dg/pr69650.c: New test. > OK. > > Also OK if you want to fixup the message. And I just realized Bernd is out due to the holidays, so I went ahead and committed this for him. jeff