From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com [170.10.133.124]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1B83C3858438 for ; Mon, 18 Jul 2022 13:28:11 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.1 sourceware.org 1B83C3858438 Received: from mail-wr1-f72.google.com (mail-wr1-f72.google.com [209.85.221.72]) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP with STARTTLS (version=TLSv1.2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id us-mta-296-zcIgGuvhN0WMR6BbgL-MnA-1; Mon, 18 Jul 2022 09:28:03 -0400 X-MC-Unique: zcIgGuvhN0WMR6BbgL-MnA-1 Received: by mail-wr1-f72.google.com with SMTP id j23-20020adfb317000000b0021d7986c07eso1995874wrd.2 for ; Mon, 18 Jul 2022 06:28:03 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:mime-version; bh=yvctXQxoRd4t6o03qWEcbFmUlmaXr2KSubmIviCH7R4=; b=xjQ+ENVhAlMi89VhCDNSsNqCHZOPO1aIf8WXsMpebFjnaWccIhsLW20P5RiGfXiwIm iwOEwOz/GkrQ/o3TaZj2SyOnFadbEDdFCfvUl2bsnnyNwCLuqWq7cWVZfwMN6D9X6Wue Lu7qVSJxOnwXg1kLNncqwef4RPUCWp25UC3Bp3ajlcIV0juaGsUoeOOe6v/5Uo4goNc9 oArNJkcudT/x/X+yvZs+JZB2ZpHEdLvtYaIwK7IafHRpVAxYebPp0jeO9FHL6YAHq763 62wMJT5JyUKYMl7lVuc2Ryw1mv2IeCnqyw+a45fuA0JwtTmh43eivTbJQH4MC49UouFy X7ag== X-Gm-Message-State: AJIora+N23iBVHFUAqyfnqvVhAdLJrkOI/gaKm5tCDPCH5386ooZrnjO 52YPvM0SqChTdvljJzg4JgVjAoLEeXl2tpKm36NjMnd6H3rBxNT4dypU9A1g9z5Val+zpJgUpz+ xeeU64aA9nTFg1GGTclNdUQ== X-Received: by 2002:a05:6000:1367:b0:21d:75cd:5ae8 with SMTP id q7-20020a056000136700b0021d75cd5ae8mr22966566wrz.282.1658150882502; Mon, 18 Jul 2022 06:28:02 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGRyM1vLd7Jjl+T9Rqm6cGtKu60Vadl5zqN8K1KHla7/XvJXqtJF3r2UomCtg7jneQ9CHuU3MkBzgw== X-Received: by 2002:a05:6000:1367:b0:21d:75cd:5ae8 with SMTP id q7-20020a056000136700b0021d75cd5ae8mr22966549wrz.282.1658150882279; Mon, 18 Jul 2022 06:28:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (15.72.115.87.dyn.plus.net. [87.115.72.15]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id p13-20020adff20d000000b0020e6ce4dabdsm10902392wro.103.2022.07.18.06.28.01 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Mon, 18 Jul 2022 06:28:01 -0700 (PDT) From: Andrew Burgess To: "Willgerodt, Felix" , Tom Tromey , Felix Willgerodt via Gdb-patches Subject: RE: [PATCH 1/1] gdb, testsuite: Adapt gdb.base/callfuncs.exp for new clang warnings. In-Reply-To: References: <20220608071717.3953324-1-felix.willgerodt@intel.com> <87fsj2nrsf.fsf@tromey.com> Date: Mon, 18 Jul 2022 14:28:00 +0100 Message-ID: <874jzesg7z.fsf@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com Content-Type: text/plain X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.1 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH, DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU, DKIM_VALID_EF, RCVD_IN_BARRACUDACENTRAL, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE, SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_NONE, 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 X-BeenThere: gdb-patches@sourceware.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Gdb-patches mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 18 Jul 2022 13:28:12 -0000 "Willgerodt, Felix via Gdb-patches" writes: >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Tom Tromey >> Sent: Freitag, 15. Juli 2022 20:40 >> To: Felix Willgerodt via Gdb-patches >> Cc: Willgerodt, Felix >> Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] gdb, testsuite: Adapt gdb.base/callfuncs.exp for >> new clang warnings. >> >> >>>>> "Felix" == Felix Willgerodt via Gdb-patches > patches@sourceware.org> writes: >> >> Felix> This patch disables those warnings with -Wno-deprecated-non- >> prototype. >> >> What happens when running the test against gcc? >> > > The test continues to pass. > I ran it with gcc 9.4, 10.3.1 and 11.3.1 on somewhat latest Ubuntu/Fedora. > There is also this comment in gdb.exp already: > > # Some C/C++ testcases unconditionally pass -Wno-foo as additional > # options to disable some warning. That is OK with GCC, because > # by design, GCC accepts any -Wno-foo option, even if it doesn't > # support -Wfoo. Clang however warns about unknown -Wno-foo by > # default, unless you pass -Wno-unknown-warning-option as well. > # We do that here, so that individual testcases don't have to > # worry about it. > > That said, I just tested it again with the latest Intel compilers. And GDB only > adds the "additional_flags=-Wno-unknown-warning-option" for clang, not > for icx/icc. I will write a new patch for that soon. But that is a separate > issue. Doesn't that mean adding this patch will can cause a test to regress with the Intel compiler? Shouldn't adding -Wno-unknown-warning-option for Intel be a prerequisite for this patch? Thanks, Andrew