[PATCH] fix powerpc64le bootstrap failure caused by r243661 (PR 78817)

Jeff Law law@redhat.com
Mon Dec 19 19:55:00 GMT 2016

On 12/19/2016 12:12 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 19, 2016 at 07:58:54PM +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>> On Mon, Dec 19, 2016 at 11:54:06AM -0700, Jeff Law wrote:
>>>>> I don't claim it can't be improved but it seems pretty good as
>>>>> it is already.  Among the 6 instances it's found in GCC three
>>>>> look like real bugs.
>>>> None look like real bugs to me.
>>> But is the warning rate so high that we need to revert/reject the warning as
>>> implemented.  That's my question.  6 across GCC doesn't sound bad across a
>>> multi-million line codebase.
>> It isn't 6 across GCC, it is 6 across a single target and single set of
>> compiler options.  Other targets and other options have different sets,
>> there is some overlap, but only partial.
> Unrelated to where the warning is issued, it might be a good idea to use
> %K to emit it with inlining stack, otherwise figuring out why it warns
> will be harder than needed.
I would think that would apply to any warning triggered once we've 
started optimizing the code.  Don't you?

More information about the Gcc-patches mailing list