From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <SRS0=d+ib=4R=gmail.com=gaiusmod2@sourceware.org>
Received: from mail-wr1-x434.google.com (mail-wr1-x434.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::434])
	by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0CC5C3858D1E
	for <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>; Mon, 19 Dec 2022 13:21:51 +0000 (GMT)
DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.1 sourceware.org 0CC5C3858D1E
Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=gmail.com
Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=gmail.com
Received: by mail-wr1-x434.google.com with SMTP id h11so8556714wrw.13
        for <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>; Mon, 19 Dec 2022 05:21:51 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
        d=gmail.com; s=20210112;
        h=mime-version:user-agent:message-id:in-reply-to:date:references
         :subject:cc:to:from:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to;
        bh=knNYQK21Ha+OEpRSoXMVb7doytneACKw8ytYeol7wgg=;
        b=iSVdEORq31jCSiLVhU73KJvZa98e1lC5TEz3oyx9RFsFnydfvOBuotC4sdNEvp9Vhh
         GRupY+mCZaDwUayWfizweA1Fvie9w+iB2dG/IUHmso+F5+qA7nUxamjs8N+/QZkbxldz
         zbRH3RdWO2f1ScOxNKHYsUL8ZCQ5a9WHDapWzPDcVYF7Mg7sjkqa3UprAOmj1zfmb5mp
         6NhqDIbXaXKWJu0T35MikoORNG6RLhp1fqPuhBydL9tpoc8FGCgPwia2yjCP1Tdncu0O
         YMXfvYN3WBHTo9Z+xN5KK1W7CYMSSDQsPrFLD8jkaNBm0Er3WK3ngi8WwaM021MrJmDa
         aTIg==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
        d=1e100.net; s=20210112;
        h=mime-version:user-agent:message-id:in-reply-to:date:references
         :subject:cc:to:from:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date
         :message-id:reply-to;
        bh=knNYQK21Ha+OEpRSoXMVb7doytneACKw8ytYeol7wgg=;
        b=KOm1LNl5trqwSrdmIMRKsaCr/bnzNyHad4VM4HZvvTnMR56D+UWDXKqLTUKmAj9lFM
         FfreDOGb/CHkNi46FbUC3GZSgXly9X3giTRd0p9bn4W+jQeN9oEwO0UTHWd3DJtMqCD5
         iX9qIsdt3NdYd4fga7+sHFvDMAgPvGr1ng4KGyEIQXzdVnKyjpjALBG5gT2r/hdss42i
         a6/mHOjaNRa4kVZSEEfCBdIthbBCaVjpZA6X8RY29LQChQoYO7XcK0xKCmfeWMiMkHo8
         Hb5O2Vd62LetpnXkGeyjIwmGU0KIL8cmBriD3CRIUIVRN7sTyP7p5fV0o6t7T6ItgMlq
         aDdQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: ANoB5pkKUU4YXWo2AYhKDLSASrEyfJSl40+dds/ZMtLTp7bBoEZYzQWG
	70r0BO6GxBV+s+pxCevrow4=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AA0mqf6tDmML5oXwtDvt2sTibNj9sFzOwi80m0Ah/Ko0EMsFaiPD6KUe3rc0kJs3Mtrr59oQeOMwvw==
X-Received: by 2002:a5d:4647:0:b0:242:12cf:fba8 with SMTP id j7-20020a5d4647000000b0024212cffba8mr34765997wrs.55.1671456109907;
        Mon, 19 Dec 2022 05:21:49 -0800 (PST)
Received: from lancelot ([195.147.220.46])
        by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id cc6-20020a5d5c06000000b002428c4fb16asm9995770wrb.10.2022.12.19.05.21.49
        (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256);
        Mon, 19 Dec 2022 05:21:49 -0800 (PST)
Received: from gaius by lancelot with local (Exim 4.94.2)
	(envelope-from <gaiusmod2@gmail.com>)
	id 1p7G5N-004DFT-Qk; Mon, 19 Dec 2022 13:21:41 +0000
From: Gaius Mulley <gaiusmod2@gmail.com>
To: Jakub Jelinek <jakub@redhat.com>
Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] modula2: Don't treat % in Modula 2 messages specially
References: <Y6BI10ixEqaLah04@tucnak>
Date: Mon, 19 Dec 2022 13:21:41 +0000
In-Reply-To: <Y6BI10ixEqaLah04@tucnak> (Jakub Jelinek's message of "Mon, 19
	Dec 2022 12:19:51 +0100")
Message-ID: <87a63jmsuy.fsf@debian>
User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.1 (gnu/linux)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.4 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,DKIM_VALID_EF,FREEMAIL_ENVFROM_END_DIGIT,FREEMAIL_FROM,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,TXREP autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on server2.sourceware.org
List-Id: <gcc-patches.gcc.gnu.org>

Jakub Jelinek <jakub@redhat.com> writes:

> Hi!
>
> On top of the just posted patch, this patch makes sure that
> any % chars in message strings aren't treated as format chars.
> None of these functions take variable number of arguments, so for
> most of format specifiers there is nowhere to take arguments from,
> it is true that a couple of format specifiers don't take any
> arguments - %%, %m, %<, %>, %' - so it is actually possible
> to use them, but one needs to verify that no other are emitted and
> that what should be printed as % is really emitted as %%.
> If the FE does that, then please ignore this patch, otherwise I think
> it is safer to do this.
>
> Bootstrapped/regtested on x86_64-linux and i686-linux.

yes it might be possible for % to slip though.  Thus much safer to avoid
the situation by using the patch.

LGTM

regards,
Gaius