On 11/19/2017 01:56 PM, Thomas Schwinge wrote:
> Hi!
>
> On Wed, 18 Oct 2017 14:48:13 +0200, Martin Liška <[email protected]> wrote:
>> This is second patch that addresses test-suite fallout. All these tests fail
>> because -Wreturn-type is
>> now on by default.
>>
>> Patch can bootstrap on ppc64le-redhat-linux and survives regression tests.
>
> ... but alters some LTO test cases as follows:
>
>> --- a/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/lto/20080907_0.C
>> +++ b/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/lto/20080907_0.C
>> @@ -1,3 +1,5 @@
>> // { dg-lto-do assemble }
>> +// { dg-lto-options "-Wno-return-type" }
>
> This means that instead of the default (without explicit
> "dg-lto-options") "LTO options torture testing" testing, we're now *only*
> testing one variant, with only the "-Wno-return-type" option specified.
>
>> --- a/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/lto/20080915_0.C
>> +++ b/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/lto/20080915_0.C
>> @@ -1,4 +1,6 @@
>> // { dg-lto-do assemble }
>> +// { dg-lto-options "-Wno-return-type" }
>
> Same, but...
>
>> @@ -16,7 +18,7 @@ int func(const Bar& b) {
>> }
>>
>> struct Baz {
>> - Bar& operator*() {}
>> + Bar& operator*() { static Bar a; return a; }
>> };
>
> ... given that you're addressing here the (only, as it seems)
> "-Wreturn-type" issue, you don't need to specify "-Wno-return-type" at
> all.
>
>> --- a/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/lto/20091002-1_0.C
>> +++ b/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/lto/20091002-1_0.C
>> @@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
>> // { dg-lto-do link }
>> // { dg-require-effective-target fpic }
>> -// { dg-lto-options {{-fPIC -flto}} }
>> +// { dg-lto-options {{-fPIC -flto -Wno-return-type}} }
>> // { dg-extra-ld-options "-fPIC -r -nostdlib" }
>
> ACK. This only tested one variant: "-fPIC -flto", now testing "-fPIC
> -flto -Wno-return-type". (Similarly for several more.)
>
>> --- a/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/lto/20101010-1_0.C
>> +++ b/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/lto/20101010-1_0.C
>> @@ -1,4 +1,5 @@
>> // { dg-lto-do link }
>> +// { dg-lto-options "-Wno-return-type" }
>
> NACK, see above.
>
>> --- a/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/lto/20101010-2_0.C
>> +++ b/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/lto/20101010-2_0.C
>> @@ -1,4 +1,5 @@
>> // { dg-lto-do link }
>> +// { dg-lto-options "-Wno-return-type" }
>
> NACK, see above.
>
>> --- a/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/lto/pr65475c_0.C
>> +++ b/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/lto/pr65475c_0.C
>> @@ -1,6 +1,7 @@
>> /* { dg-lto-do link } */
>> -/* { dg-lto-options "-O2 -w" } */
>> /* { dg-extra-ld-options { -O2 -Wno-odr -r -nostdlib } } */
>> +/* { dg-lto-options { "-O2 -w -Wno-return-type" } } */
>
> I don't know about that one. This previously tested two variants
> separately: "-O2" and "-w", and you've now changed it to test one
> combined variant: "-O2 -w -Wno-return-type". Your change is correct if
> this previously meant to test the combined variant "-O2 -w" instead of
> each of them separately -- which I don't know/have not verified.
Hello.
I don't think so, I've just tested that and all invocations of the source file
have '-O2 -w' in corresponding command line. Can you please verify that it
builds
all possible combinations of provided arguments of dg-lto-options?
>
>> --- a/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/lto/pr69589_0.C
>> +++ b/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/lto/pr69589_0.C
>> @@ -1,5 +1,5 @@
>> // { dg-lto-do link }
>> -// { dg-lto-options "-O2 -rdynamic" }
>> +// { dg-lto-options { "-O2 -rdynamic -Wno-return-type" } }
>> // { dg-extra-ld-options "-r -nostdlib" }
>
> Same: "-O2" and "-rdynamic" separately vs. now "-O2 -rdynamic
> -Wno-return-type" combined.
>
> Unfortunately, we can't use "dg-options" or "dg-additional-options" here:
>
> WARNING: lto.exp does not support dg-additional-options
> WARNING: lto.exp does not support dg-options in primary source file
I know, I've tried that :)
Martin
>
> OK to fix the first four issues as follows? If approving this, please
> respond with "Reviewed-by: NAME <EMAIL>" so that your effort will be
> recorded. See <https://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/Reviewed-by>.
>
> diff --git gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/lto/20080907_0.C
> gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/lto/20080907_0.C
> index a423196..153d0ab 100644
> --- gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/lto/20080907_0.C
> +++ gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/lto/20080907_0.C
> @@ -1,5 +1,7 @@
> // { dg-lto-do assemble }
> -// { dg-lto-options "-Wno-return-type" }
> +
> +/* "WARNING: lto.exp does not support dg-additional-options" */
> +#pragma GCC diagnostic ignored "-Wreturn-type"
>
> struct Foo { void func (); }; Foo & bar () { } struct Baz { Baz (Baz &); };
> Baz dummy() { bar().func(); }
> diff --git gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/lto/20080915_0.C
> gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/lto/20080915_0.C
> index 40c5042..c91e756 100644
> --- gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/lto/20080915_0.C
> +++ gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/lto/20080915_0.C
> @@ -1,5 +1,4 @@
> // { dg-lto-do assemble }
> -// { dg-lto-options "-Wno-return-type" }
>
> struct Foo {
> static const int dummy;
> diff --git gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/lto/20101010-1_0.C
> gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/lto/20101010-1_0.C
> index 8f694c7..bb3e6d4 100644
> --- gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/lto/20101010-1_0.C
> +++ gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/lto/20101010-1_0.C
> @@ -1,5 +1,7 @@
> // { dg-lto-do link }
> -// { dg-lto-options "-Wno-return-type" }
> +
> +/* "WARNING: lto.exp does not support dg-additional-options" */
> +#pragma GCC diagnostic ignored "-Wreturn-type"
>
> typedef long size_t;
> template < class, class > struct pair
> diff --git gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/lto/20101010-2_0.C
> gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/lto/20101010-2_0.C
> index a26956f..721ac01 100644
> --- gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/lto/20101010-2_0.C
> +++ gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/lto/20101010-2_0.C
> @@ -1,5 +1,7 @@
> // { dg-lto-do link }
> -// { dg-lto-options "-Wno-return-type" }
> +
> +/* "WARNING: lto.exp does not support dg-additional-options" */
> +#pragma GCC diagnostic ignored "-Wreturn-type"
>
> typedef int size_t;
> template < size_t _Nw > struct _Base_bitset
>
>
> Grüße
> Thomas
>
