On Tue, Oct 13, 2015 at 02:28:37PM +0200, Bernd Schmidt wrote:
> On 10/13/2015 02:02 PM, Dominik Vogt wrote:
> >When "#pragma GCC pop_options" is used on a platform without
> >support for "#pragma GCC target", Gcc emits a warning. As
> >pop_options is useful on targets without the target pragma to
> >restore optimizations flags, the warning should be removed.
> >
> >The attached patch does that rather inelegantly by checking if the
> >pragma_parse hook points to the default implementation. I could't
> >think of a similarly terse but less clumsy way. Suggestions for a
> >better test are very welcome.
>
> Why not just remove the code that emits the warning message? Are
> there situations where the warning is justified?
Removing the warning would also affect "#pragma GCC target("foo")
But then, "#pragma GCC asdfg" doesn't produce a warning either, so
what's the point warning about an undefined "target" pragma, but
not about other undefined pragmas. For me, either way to do this
is good.
By the way, the background is that Glibc used pop_options and the
warning broke building with -Werror (they have solved that in a
different way now).
Ciao
Dominik ^_^ ^_^
--
Dominik Vogt
IBM Germany
