From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 104250 invoked by alias); 22 Feb 2017 18:32:30 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org Received: (qmail 103938 invoked by uid 89); 22 Feb 2017 18:32:29 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 spammy=retried, H*MI:sk:m3wpcii, H*f:sk:m3wpcii, H*i:sk:m3wpcii X-HELO: mail-wm0-f49.google.com Received: from mail-wm0-f49.google.com (HELO mail-wm0-f49.google.com) (74.125.82.49) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Wed, 22 Feb 2017 18:32:27 +0000 Received: by mail-wm0-f49.google.com with SMTP id v77so6543748wmv.1 for ; Wed, 22 Feb 2017 10:32:27 -0800 (PST) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:date:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=zCLiUBchUx9X9SVKhGJaTjXLFaeILIZIWyDXVUi6Xng=; b=Ek/Kox0PmNbZRMw7AT9tHqqw7JNSPdPRaFBXSwLX33mVNVTSJ7WRxPLCXmY1fz6rQq DK4VT/gMjiytRDAXZD0UM+MLMMr8OXchKpLJYsJCh5EIMYPYVPdIRD4Z87E59bF3K/7I dMuTh13LvG6lYPHcFVEtt5r4xK6IYPgqHJxRzIskCoXUkjdUX34kBYF0H149maoVCdbq 0OCo8az5FbapohJ674WALuzxWJ+gNyzoHcgMaQU20TqHbBM5yUBS2Uz16LA3Says0Oar ixu7IuKkg5ynST3FGpWKjMKOqYB5VpgY5irVTr9psRIBXKvczncapcbjpL8djxXZEup3 oApA== X-Gm-Message-State: AMke39nC25vdABHxa5Uj7dwvqYsWA2kHOrK6ajqWOw+3zvYXozGqAS3GghsjLazDX4QEP2a9 X-Received: by 10.28.12.13 with SMTP id 13mr3480939wmm.10.1487788345345; Wed, 22 Feb 2017 10:32:25 -0800 (PST) Received: from host1.jankratochvil.net (host1.jankratochvil.net. [2a02:2b88:2:1::3b57:1]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id r6sm3079284wmd.4.2017.02.22.10.32.24 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-CHACHA20-POLY1305 bits=256/256); Wed, 22 Feb 2017 10:32:24 -0800 (PST) From: Jan Kratochvil X-Google-Original-From: Jan Kratochvil Date: Wed, 22 Feb 2017 18:32:00 -0000 To: Andreas Arnez Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org, Victor Leschuk Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 4/8] DWARF-5 basic functionality Message-ID: <20170222183222.GA10292@host1.jankratochvil.net> References: <148753968011.4016.6818202131640662529.stgit@host1.jankratochvil.net> <148753970532.4016.14210350935498491454.stgit@host1.jankratochvil.net> <20170222142857.GA25383@host1.jankratochvil.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.7.1 (2016-10-04) X-SW-Source: 2017-02/txt/msg00604.txt.bz2 On Wed, 22 Feb 2017 18:38:11 +0100, Andreas Arnez wrote: > On Wed, Feb 22 2017, Jan Kratochvil wrote: > > > What compiler/version/options do you use? I have tried now > > gcc-4.8.5-11.el7.x86_64 > > CFLAGS=-O3 CXXFLAGS=-O3 ./configure;make > > I saw the warning with an upstream GCC I recently built myself for > s390x. Today I retried with a fresh version from GCC git, with the same > result: gcc (GCC) 7.0.1 20170222 (experimental) g++ (GCC) 7.0.1 20170218 (experimental) ~/redhat/gcchead-root/bin/g++ -m64 -g3 -pipe -Wall -fexceptions -fstack-protector-strong --param=ssp-buffer-size=4 -fno-diagnostics-show-caret -I. -I. -I./common -I./config -DLOCALEDIR="\"/usr/local/share/locale\"" -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I./../include/opcode -I./../opcodes/.. -I./../readline/.. -I./../zlib -I../bfd -I./../bfd -I./../include -I../libdecnumber -I./../libdecnumber -I./gnulib/import -Ibuild-gnulib/import -DTUI=1 -I/usr/include/python3.5m -I/usr/include/python3.5m -Wall -Wpointer-arith -Wno-unused -Wunused-value -Wunused-function -Wno-switch -Wno-char-subscripts -Wempty-body -Wunused-but-set-parameter -Wunused-but-set-variable -Wno-sign-compare -Wno-write-strings -Wno-narrowing -Wformat-nonliteral -Werror -c -o dwarf2read.o -MT dwarf2read.o -MMD -MP -MF .deps/dwarf2read.Tpo dwarf2read.c -O3 But on x86_64. I can try building trunk GCC on s390x but do you really have the warnings unreproducible on x86_64? > Sure. Unfortunately the maybe-uninitialized warnings highly depend on > compiler version, platform, optimization level, etc. Since this is a > false positive, I don't necessarily propose a change in this case. Also there are already many warnings just with RHEL-7.3 x86_64 GCC for example. Jan