From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org (eggs.gnu.org [IPv6:2001:470:142:3::10]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 092CC3858C3A; Tue, 14 May 2024 22:47:10 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.2 sourceware.org 092CC3858C3A Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.ibm.com Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; spf=fail smtp.mailfrom=linux.ibm.com ARC-Filter: OpenARC Filter v1.0.0 sourceware.org 092CC3858C3A Authentication-Results: server2.sourceware.org; arc=none smtp.remote-ip=2001:470:142:3::10 ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=sourceware.org; s=key; t=1715726831; cv=none; b=F9xLV+A1ZZ1uipRphNWABBRUdluFMBHqXOBg7sTr7i2/YcIYPVKLMFDeiivvhfslQSejE3yMk+P1hJYboRt++f96wa1m/9LLX1kiY5VqPO31Yzqof07ycvLPCEtFQBG1CMSjKP0l0fECWSweN2gNtNWvL8Tq/ITBLSzHnk+0QMQ= ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=sourceware.org; s=key; t=1715726831; c=relaxed/simple; bh=lcAhVeudbq6dzeRVZobm0l12S/ZWpE0mrnc5t4bY0lE=; h=DKIM-Signature:From:To:Subject:Date:Message-ID:MIME-Version; b=c8Idu3QMcEbyCWeS/tWIpu3gby9cNH6WZ/MmPea0DRiD6JBvmFqdNnZbv+zhRwhI8f2rzvnw3ekFE404Uz9ujY0Xs76RneY1hQrXKny0qwQOqStwL9cQnAWS7VtKyBzfLaI7PC5Cx0dlhn1UsXUAT4o1Pm5mrTroS9iiBnCQYSk= ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; server2.sourceware.org Received: from mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com ([148.163.158.5]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1s6orF-0005YX-JP; Tue, 14 May 2024 05:54:07 -0400 Received: from pps.filterd (m0360072.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (8.17.1.19/8.17.1.19) with ESMTP id 44E9eWRD010307; Tue, 14 May 2024 09:54:04 GMT DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ibm.com; h=from : to : cc : subject : references : date : in-reply-to : message-id : mime-version : content-type; s=pp1; bh=p5pR81DgtI6UX9smn9kNOlRD8Ue0qKr8bdFAlhm29dI=; b=GV9ydwOd90l49fo/fHthxk1OIT/bzj+nVeT1odaYZvMZDumdVSNG0w26sHoAynEnouAT mL5HnZbcoaY/USJgA/WO86MmkNwA0r69r44DJeLUjkfheCiXULCX+KqKGkOKaDrGKT4o qT15GFD+7+Ne3vDr+fPCnJTB3XCJ4VHAze4p1DUD1AaM3UW9yTofD3rY5nI+sTGtQJvi fE4YNHq4dMGcFM+yhcNuOdY45zkcemeAL0prduggOHPQ/8vFJYnB+lq6y5kO5k205vWc TyJHIFHqPRz3G6/BhVAQ0Lm0uWccKYtgCjGyDuG5ukkNGJjlhUSFZV7aK+pNJW0XzETL /Q== Received: from pps.reinject (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (PPS) with ESMTPS id 3y45gk00yj-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Tue, 14 May 2024 09:54:03 +0000 Received: from m0360072.ppops.net (m0360072.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by pps.reinject (8.17.1.5/8.17.1.5) with ESMTP id 44E9s3JM029456; Tue, 14 May 2024 09:54:03 GMT Received: from ppma13.dal12v.mail.ibm.com (dd.9e.1632.ip4.static.sl-reverse.com [50.22.158.221]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (PPS) with ESMTPS id 3y45gk00yg-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Tue, 14 May 2024 09:54:03 +0000 Received: from pps.filterd (ppma13.dal12v.mail.ibm.com [127.0.0.1]) by ppma13.dal12v.mail.ibm.com (8.17.1.19/8.17.1.19) with ESMTP id 44E9hL5h029568; Tue, 14 May 2024 09:54:02 GMT Received: from smtprelay02.wdc07v.mail.ibm.com ([172.16.1.69]) by ppma13.dal12v.mail.ibm.com (PPS) with ESMTPS id 3y2n7kmct6-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Tue, 14 May 2024 09:54:02 +0000 Received: from smtpav04.dal12v.mail.ibm.com (smtpav04.dal12v.mail.ibm.com [10.241.53.103]) by smtprelay02.wdc07v.mail.ibm.com (8.14.9/8.14.9/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id 44E9rwGU61866470 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK); Tue, 14 May 2024 09:54:01 GMT Received: from smtpav04.dal12v.mail.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id A643458062; Tue, 14 May 2024 09:53:58 +0000 (GMT) Received: from smtpav04.dal12v.mail.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8A19E58063; Tue, 14 May 2024 09:53:58 +0000 (GMT) Received: from genoa (unknown [9.40.192.157]) by smtpav04.dal12v.mail.ibm.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS; Tue, 14 May 2024 09:53:58 +0000 (GMT) From: Jiufu Guo To: Segher Boessenkool Cc: "Kewen.Lin" , dje.gcc@gmail.com, linkw@gcc.gnu.org, bergner@linux.ibm.com, gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] report message for operator %a on unaddressible exp References: <20240513025712.889169-1-guojiufu@linux.ibm.com> <20240514092054.GF19790@gate.crashing.org> Date: Tue, 14 May 2024 17:53:56 +0800 In-Reply-To: <20240514092054.GF19790@gate.crashing.org> (Segher Boessenkool's message of "Tue, 14 May 2024 04:20:54 -0500") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/26.3 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-TM-AS-GCONF: 00 X-Proofpoint-ORIG-GUID: yg2xdBKyvK3REudbysfnH0vpLEGxnZEn X-Proofpoint-GUID: onQ6FB6uQ3mJOw0X5PXiD-u3VzYUUpMa X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=baseguard engine=ICAP:2.0.293,Aquarius:18.0.1039,Hydra:6.0.650,FMLib:17.11.176.26 definitions=2024-05-14_04,2024-05-10_02,2023-05-22_02 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_notspam policy=outbound score=0 mlxlogscore=723 impostorscore=0 lowpriorityscore=0 phishscore=0 bulkscore=0 mlxscore=0 malwarescore=0 priorityscore=1501 clxscore=1015 spamscore=0 adultscore=0 suspectscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.12.0-2405010000 definitions=main-2405140069 Received-SPF: pass client-ip=148.163.158.5; envelope-from=guojiufu@linux.ibm.com; helo=mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com X-Spam_score_int: -19 X-Spam_score: -2.0 X-Spam_bar: -- X-Spam_report: (-2.0 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9,DKIM_SIGNED=0.1,DKIM_VALID=-0.1,DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1,RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4=0.001,RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001,SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001,SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_EF,KAM_STOCKGEN,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_SOFTFAIL,TXREP autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on server2.sourceware.org List-Id: Hi, Segher Boessenkool writes: > Oh, btw: > > On Tue, May 14, 2024 at 11:00:38AM +0800, Jiufu Guo wrote: >> >> --- a/gcc/config/rs6000/rs6000.cc >> >> +++ b/gcc/config/rs6000/rs6000.cc >> >> @@ -14659,6 +14659,12 @@ print_operand_address (FILE *file, rtx x) >> >> else if (SYMBOL_REF_P (x) || GET_CODE (x) == CONST >> >> || GET_CODE (x) == LABEL_REF) >> >> { >> >> + if (this_is_asm_operands && !address_operand (x, VOIDmode)) >> >> + { >> >> + output_operand_lossage ("invalid expression as operand"); >> >> + return; >> >> + } > > That error message is not so good. Firstly, it typically *is* a valid > expression here, just not a correct expression to have for an address. > But, more generally and usefully, the error message should say *what* is > wrong about the expression (namely, it is not an address). Thanks so much for your great review! Reference other messages, I'm wondering "invalid %%a value" may be acceptable, or "invalid %%a address expression in TOC" maybe better. > > Most of the time you can use the same error message for asm and other > expressions, and you get a great message in all contexts. > operand_lossage already takes care of telling the user "you did > something foolish" for inline asm, or "ICE" if it is a compiler problem > instead. > > In error messages you do not often know what caused the problem, so > just report on the facts you *do* know (and moreso with warnings, there > you typically only know something looks unusual). > Thanks again for helpful comments! BR, Jeff(Jiufu) Guo. > > Segher