From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-pf1-x42e.google.com (mail-pf1-x42e.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::42e]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D979F3857C77 for ; Fri, 2 Jul 2021 21:53:20 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.1 sourceware.org D979F3857C77 Received: by mail-pf1-x42e.google.com with SMTP id x16so10250199pfa.13 for ; Fri, 02 Jul 2021 14:53:20 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding :content-language; bh=KH3ReK+XHRkCGSy7Pe132tWDryp0qH6jzh+RyKQ7OAQ=; b=Vc/xBTgc4/FvhZZbO4LeDKNxlt2g1zZmto453DN57ND2psxCbdQ68QyA+x0HBiV/YO 1a8kO5RX1mJIoNnTEFAW+g4YWyTvdgMzuLqA5nstIIqH12av8xRRTMrhC3bSmnhYUhjw XGsz5dACnVAaolm0BXKIQWZy9jArI8U+p/e98ApfwmAuzxoaLF4LoU5/PO3h33Qw16Ac YlFsDHH4x41ydN/BSqv/yF98jrZMowiHQhUpZ2WD0BpT/Unui9obqKOSKM3QhfmTFajX mIx16LF6Bb1IkVQ4JwQLpUx9A2zpnkK46zkarIkN0ngZ6tv4v/83Opmq9Ua5c/OS+Nqv 6VCA== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530F1YMt9m77hUllknDNp0d0Bf5FD18dI1v3yyoQZEMLuIMW73YT sBnEHMy+X23jqweLBE9Q/fY= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJw/R7tvQaEgmXsV0NM8b/rJQUpWnGdpX0bMN9NVH1lCz89E1s7plSmeH1ZUNvb13mpo42JAWg== X-Received: by 2002:a63:fa50:: with SMTP id g16mr2078665pgk.16.1625262799938; Fri, 02 Jul 2021 14:53:19 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.1.16] (c-98-202-48-222.hsd1.ut.comcast.net. [98.202.48.222]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id l7sm5104849pgb.19.2021.07.02.14.53.17 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Fri, 02 Jul 2021 14:53:19 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Re: [PING][PATCH 2/4] remove %G and %K from calls in front end and middle end (PR 98512) To: Aldy Hernandez , Martin Sebor , David Malcolm , gcc-patches Cc: Jeff Law References: <2e49b6c6-a403-a207-c41e-58f78df96b84@gmail.com> <945093c7-de5e-0350-6030-e4e79ea41161@gmail.com> <5aff247f-dfcb-cecf-e07e-b5fca877f911@gmail.com> <36e75bb4-2c3c-5b3a-9fe1-9cdb046666a3@gmail.com> <12ed261b-d35e-4c07-949a-67e085cec750@gmail.com> <7b58bb26-fab6-fc65-32e5-e09139474ba5@gmail.com> <9fd191802dfa8724ec0e09bac796c8c375ebf678.camel@redhat.com> <8632a55d-dacc-7173-4576-7c9ae96e63d8@gmail.com> <34c98694-2e2f-a4a4-061e-70c49f34444b@redhat.com> From: Jeff Law Message-ID: <63629141-2537-ad03-3eae-217cf3096d90@gmail.com> Date: Fri, 2 Jul 2021 15:53:15 -0600 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.11.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <34c98694-2e2f-a4a4-061e-70c49f34444b@redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Content-Language: en-US X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.4 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00, DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU, DKIM_VALID_EF, FREEMAIL_FROM, NICE_REPLY_A, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE, SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS, TXREP autolearn=ham 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-patches@gcc.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Gcc-patches mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 02 Jul 2021 21:53:24 -0000 On 7/2/2021 12:56 AM, Aldy Hernandez via Gcc-patches wrote: > > > On 7/1/21 10:14 PM, Martin Sebor wrote: >> On 6/30/21 5:35 PM, David Malcolm wrote: >>> On Wed, 2021-06-30 at 13:45 -0600, Martin Sebor wrote: >>>> On 6/30/21 9:39 AM, Martin Sebor wrote: > >>>> @@ -90,8 +90,8 @@ NOIPA void warn_g2 (struct A *p) >>>>     g2 (p); >>>>   } >>>> -// { dg-message "inlined from 'g2'" "" { target *-*-* } 0 } >>>> -// { dg-message "inlined from 'warn_g2'" "" { target *-*-* } 0 } >>>> +// { dg-message "inlined from 'g2'" "note on line 93" { target >>>> *-*-* } 0 } >>>> +// { dg-message "inlined from 'warn_g2'" "note on line 94" { >>>> target *-*-* } 0 } >>> >>> You've added descriptions to disambiguate all of the various directives >>> on line 0, which is good, but I don't like the use of line numbers in >>> the descriptions, since it will get very confusing if the numbering >>> changes. >>> >>> Would it work to use the message text as the description e.g. >>> >>>    // { dg-message "inlined from 'warn_g2'" "inlined from 'warn_g2'" >>> { target *-*-* } 0 } >>> >>> or somesuch? >> >> It would certainly work, they're just informational labels printed >> by DejaGnu when the assertions fail.  I added them to help me see >> what they went with while working with the test.  I'm not concerned >> about the line numbers changing.  If they do and someone notices, >> they can update them, the same way they might want to if they >> rename the functions they're inlined into. > > I agree with David.  Having too specific tests adds an extra > maintenance burden.  You may not mind updating all the line numbers > when anything changes, but others may certainly mind. I agree in general, but if the thing we're testing for was a bug in the line number handling, then we probably do want to check the line #s. jeff