This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: Representative returns and location info (Re: [RFC, PATCH] Display inlining context for uninitialized warnings)
- From: Eric Botcazou <ebotcazou at adacore dot com>
- To: Vladislav Ivanishin <vlad at ispras dot ru>
- Cc: Jeff Law <law at redhat dot com>, Martin Sebor <msebor at gmail dot com>, gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org, David Malcolm <dmalcolm at redhat dot com>, Andreas Krebbel <krebbel at linux dot ibm dot com>
- Date: Wed, 24 Jul 2019 15:38:51 +0200
- Subject: Re: Representative returns and location info (Re: [RFC, PATCH] Display inlining context for uninitialized warnings)
- References: <firstname.lastname@example.org> <email@example.com> <firstname.lastname@example.org>
> (Let's focus on location info and representative returns in this
> AFAIU, a return statement may be chosen as a representative return for a
> function. The representative return's location is set to
> UNKNOWN_LOCATION, because otherwise the results of coverage analysis are
> skewed. What is the difficulty preventing us from having both the
> location info for the return and faithful coverage?
That's simply impossible since you merge two instructions with different
locations into a single one. But the return location should be on the goto.