From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-patches-return-412683-listarch-gcc-patches=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: (qmail 45844 invoked by alias); 4 Nov 2015 21:02:59 -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 45833 invoked by uid 89); 4 Nov 2015 21:02:58 -0000
Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none
X-Virus-Found: No
X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-1.5 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,FREEMAIL_FROM,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2
X-HELO: mail-wm0-f52.google.com
Received: from mail-wm0-f52.google.com (HELO mail-wm0-f52.google.com) (74.125.82.52) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with (AES128-GCM-SHA256 encrypted) ESMTPS; Wed, 04 Nov 2015 21:02:57 +0000
Received: by wmeg8 with SMTP id g8so52025686wme.1        for <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>; Wed, 04 Nov 2015 13:02:54 -0800 (PST)
X-Received: by 10.28.173.67 with SMTP id w64mr28876476wme.71.1446670974841; Wed, 04 Nov 2015 13:02:54 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.28.186.4 with HTTP; Wed, 4 Nov 2015 13:02:15 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <9BCE0DCA-FF55-4C94-ADA0-78AAE57CA26B@mrs.kithrup.com>
References: <CAESRpQAss9wY48rxjsVC_VHn5c2bC+ZKf4m6fvL-ZNVFLkmKEA@mail.gmail.com> <20150525195650.GY27320@redhat.com> <CAESRpQA=V4JmGTzOmJxgjCe+_mUMXdhMMVBnuGiDeW8LxOYi5A@mail.gmail.com> <CAKdteOYY1O50YLv7URgXX1Yiht=VPJvgT6Z8p2k6bUrDfb6pCw@mail.gmail.com> <CAESRpQCe5=ih8-kw-kMg7v+rxLHbfdr3VtGAfbyyPFJ=Fez+aQ@mail.gmail.com> <9BCE0DCA-FF55-4C94-ADA0-78AAE57CA26B@mrs.kithrup.com>
From: =?UTF-8?B?TWFudWVsIEzDs3Blei1JYsOhw7Fleg==?= <lopezibanez@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 04 Nov 2015 21:02:00 -0000
Message-ID: <CAESRpQBAndAxL8xtUQQK5HTpNudR0bjQGdUQpP84KNXgyb9Bmw@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH c/c++] use explicit locations for some warnings in c-pragma.c
To: Mike Stump <mrs@mrs.kithrup.com>
Cc: Christophe Lyon <christophe.lyon@linaro.org>, Marek Polacek <polacek@redhat.com>, 	Gcc Patch List <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>, "Joseph S. Myers" <joseph@codesourcery.com>, 	Jason Merrill <jason@redhat.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
X-SW-Source: 2015-11/txt/msg00399.txt.bz2

On 4 November 2015 at 09:45, Mike Stump <mrs@mrs.kithrup.com> wrote:
> in the top of the tree.  This is bad as the same line appears in a PASS: and an XFAIL:.  Each test case should be unique.  Should it be updated to 64?

I think it is sufficient to change it to:

/* { dg-warning "24:missing" "wrong column" { xfail *-*-* }  2 } */

This dg-warning is there to show that the column number is wrong and
tell whoever fixes this that there is already a test that only needs
updating. Changing 24 to 64 defeats the purpose of having it in the
first place.

Cheers,

Manuel.