Prathamesh Kulkarni <[email protected]> writes:
> Hi,
> The attached patch emits a more verbose diagnostic for target attribute that
> is an architecture extension needing a leading '+'.
>
> For the following test,
> void calculate(void) __attribute__ ((__target__ ("sve")));
>
> With patch, the compiler now emits:
> 102376.c:1:1: error: arch extension ‘sve’ should be prepended with ‘+’
> 1 | void calculate(void) __attribute__ ((__target__ ("sve")));
> | ^~~~
>
> instead of:
> 102376.c:1:1: error: pragma or attribute ‘target("sve")’ is not valid
> 1 | void calculate(void) __attribute__ ((__target__ ("sve")));
> | ^~~~
Nice :-)
> (This isn't specific to sve though).
> OK to commit after bootstrap+test ?
>
> Thanks,
> Prathamesh
>
> diff --git a/gcc/config/aarch64/aarch64.c b/gcc/config/aarch64/aarch64.c
> index a9a1800af53..975f7faf968 100644
> --- a/gcc/config/aarch64/aarch64.c
> +++ b/gcc/config/aarch64/aarch64.c
> @@ -17821,7 +17821,16 @@ aarch64_process_target_attr (tree args)
> num_attrs++;
> if (!aarch64_process_one_target_attr (token))
> {
> - error ("pragma or attribute %<target(\"%s\")%> is not valid", token);
> + /* Check if token is possibly an arch extension without
> + leading '+'. */
> + char *str = (char *) xmalloc (strlen (token) + 2);
> + str[0] = '+';
> + strcpy(str + 1, token);
I think std::string would be better here, e.g.:
auto with_plus = std::string ("+") + token;
> + if (aarch64_handle_attr_isa_flags (str))
> + error("arch extension %<%s%> should be prepended with %<+%>",
> token);
Nit: should be a space before the “(”.
In principle, a fixit hint would have been nice here, but I don't think
we have enough information to provide one. (Just saying for the record.)
Thanks,
Richard
> + else
> + error ("pragma or attribute %<target(\"%s\")%> is not valid",
> token);
> + free (str);
> return false;
> }
>
