public inbox for gcc-prs@sourceware.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Steven Bosscher <s.bosscher@student.tudelft.nl>
To: nobody@gcc.gnu.org
Cc: gcc-prs@gcc.gnu.org,
Subject: Re: optimization/7189: gcc -O2 -Wall does not print ``control reaches end of non-void function'' warning
Date: Sat, 01 Mar 2003 22:56:00 -0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20030301225600.18297.qmail@sources.redhat.com> (raw)

The following reply was made to PR optimization/7189; it has been noted by GNATS.

From: Steven Bosscher <s.bosscher@student.tudelft.nl>
To: Richard Henderson <rth@redhat.com>
Cc: gcc-gnats@gcc.gnu.org, gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org,
	gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org, nobody@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: Re: optimization/7189: gcc -O2 -Wall does not print ``control
	reaches end of non-void function'' warning
Date: 01 Mar 2003 23:55:33 +0100

 Op za 01-03-2003, om 01:30 schreef Richard Henderson:
 > On Thu, Feb 13, 2003 at 10:04:14PM +0100, Steven Bosscher wrote:
 > > One way to "fix" this bug is to move check_function_return_warnings() up
 > > to before sibling call optimization in toplev.c, but maybe there's a
 > > more correct fix?
 > 
 > I take that back.  Moving this to just after
 > delete_unreachable_blocks should be just fine.
 
 I just bootstrapped all except Ada and treelang with the attached patch,
 regtesting now.  OK for mainline and 3.3 if it passes?
 
 Greetz
 Steven
 
 2003-03-01  Steven Bosscher  <s.bosscher@student.tudelft.nl>
 
 	PR optimization/7189
 	* toplev.c (rest_of_compilation):  Move
 	check_function_return_warnings up to just after
 	delete_unreachable_blocks.
 
 
 Index: toplev.c
 ===================================================================
 RCS file: /cvs/gcc/gcc/gcc/toplev.c,v
 retrieving revision 1.725
 diff -c -3 -p -r1.725 toplev.c
 *** toplev.c	1 Mar 2003 01:21:22 -0000	1.725
 --- toplev.c	1 Mar 2003 22:43:44 -0000
 *************** rest_of_compilation (decl)
 *** 2625,2630 ****
 --- 2625,2634 ----
   
     delete_unreachable_blocks ();
   
 +   /* We have to issue these warnings now already, because CFG cleanups
 +      further down may destroy the required information.  */
 +   check_function_return_warnings ();
 + 
     /* Turn NOTE_INSN_PREDICTIONs into branch predictions.  */
     if (flag_guess_branch_prob)
       {
 *************** rest_of_compilation (decl)
 *** 3179,3186 ****
   
     open_dump_file (DFI_life, decl);
     regclass_init ();
 - 
 -   check_function_return_warnings ();
   
   #ifdef ENABLE_CHECKING
     verify_flow_info ();
 --- 3183,3188 ----
 


             reply	other threads:[~2003-03-01 22:56 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2003-03-01 22:56 Steven Bosscher [this message]
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2003-03-02 21:06 Richard Henderson
2003-03-01  0:36 Richard Henderson
2003-03-01  0:36 Richard Henderson
2003-02-13 21:06 Steven Bosscher
2003-02-13 15:36 Steven Bosscher
2002-07-02 21:06 am-99173

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20030301225600.18297.qmail@sources.redhat.com \
    --to=s.bosscher@student.tudelft.nl \
    --cc=gcc-prs@gcc.gnu.org \
    --cc=nobody@gcc.gnu.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).