Re: [PATCH, rs6000] Clean up capitalized diagnostic messages

[Bill Schmidt <wschmidt@linux.vnet.ibm.com>]

> On Aug 2, 2017, at 6:43 PM, Segher Boessenkool <segher@kernel.crashing.org> wrote:
> 
> Hi Bill,
> 
> On Wed, Aug 02, 2017 at 10:29:20AM -0500, Bill Schmidt wrote:
>> I don't anticipate backporting any of this.
> 
> Good :-)
> 
>> @@ -6802,7 +6802,7 @@ altivec_resolve_overloaded_builtin (location_t loc
>>     if (unsupported_builtin)
>>       {
>> 	const char *name = rs6000_overloaded_builtin_name (fcode);
>> -	error ("Builtin function %s not supported in this compiler configuration",
>> +	error ("builtin function %s not supported in this compiler configuration",
>> 	       name);
> 
> As Martin says, %qs for this and similar (see the documentation before
> pp_format in pretty-print.c).  Can be a separate patch of course, this
> one is big enough already.
> 
>> Index: gcc/config/rs6000/rs6000.c
>> ===================================================================
>> --- gcc/config/rs6000/rs6000.c	(revision 250791)
>> +++ gcc/config/rs6000/rs6000.c	(working copy)
>> @@ -4132,7 +4132,7 @@ rs6000_option_override_internal (bool global_init_
>>       || rs6000_cpu == PROCESSOR_PPCE5500)
>>     {
>>       if (TARGET_ALTIVEC)
>> -	error ("AltiVec not supported in this target");
>> +	error ("altivec not supported in this target");
>>     }
>> 
>>   /* If we are optimizing big endian systems for space, use the load/store
> 
> Let's either keep AltiVec or say -maltivec.  We only have this warning
> because we allow -maltivec with CPUs that do not support it; and this
> warning is only for some of the FSL CPUs.  It isn't very consistent.

Back to AltiVec it goes!  Thanks.

> 
>> @@ -4250,7 +4250,7 @@ rs6000_option_override_internal (bool global_init_
>> 	      rs6000_isa_flags |= (ISA_3_0_MASKS_SERVER & ~ignore_masks);
>> 	    }
>> 	  else
>> -	    error ("Power9 target option is incompatible with -mcpu=<xxx> for "
>> +	    error ("power9 target option is incompatible with -mcpu=<xxx> for "
>> 		   "<xxx> less than power9");
>> 	}
>>       else if ((ISA_3_0_MASKS_SERVER & rs6000_isa_flags_explicit)
> 
> See also PR79477.  Since many of these options are going away it is
> probably not worth spending too much time on this, not until stage 3
> or so anyway.

Yeah, let's address that later in the year after Mike finishes his cleanups.

> 
>> @@ -11226,7 +11226,7 @@ rs6000_return_in_memory (const_tree type, const_tr
>>       static bool warned_for_return_big_vectors = false;
>>       if (!warned_for_return_big_vectors)
>> 	{
>> -	  warning (OPT_Wpsabi, "GCC vector returned by reference: "
>> +	  warning (OPT_Wpsabi, "gcc vector returned by reference: "
>> 		   "non-standard ABI extension with no compatibility guarantee");
>> 	  warned_for_return_big_vectors = true;
>> 	}
> 
> Maybe the warning should just say "big vector"?  Or "generic vector"?
> 
> (Vectors that fit in one VR, or in GPRs in 8 bytes or less, do not have
> the problem this warns for.  Kind of hard to express tersely and
> precisely though).

I looked in the GCC manual and couldn't find a better way of expressing
this than just "GCC vector," so I will return it to the way it was.  "GCC 
vector extension vector" is accurate but hardly trips lightly off the
tongue...

> 
> Approved for trunk with whichever of the suggested changes you think
> are good.  Thanks,

Thanks much!

Bill

> 
> 
> Segher
>