On 21 September 2015 at 10:18, Richard Biener
<richard.guent...@gmail.com> wrote:
> input_location is set from the call stmt:
>
> /* FIXME: instantiate_decl isn't called by inlinable_function_p. */
> saved_location = input_location;
> input_location = gimple_location (stmt);
>
> it would be nice to get rid of that.
I could replace all uses of input_location in this function by
gimple_location(stmt) as I noted in the comments. Would that be ok if
it works? I'm not sure I can prove that input_location is not used
behind the scenes for some other purpose (all the more reason to kill
input_location once and for all). Friends, don't let friends use
input_location in new code!
> If the call is artificially generated it might have no location so I
> think the assert
> is bogus. Also in the case of UNKNOWN_LOCATION it would be nice to at
I was sure of that, but I was also surprised that not a single
testcase was triggering it. I can re-submit without the assert.
> least note the function we are failing to inline to (thus, use
> DECL_SOURCE_LOCATION
> of cfun->decl). So better add a diag_location and compute that upfront to
> avoid
> repeating the check.
error ("inlining failed in call to always_inline %q+F: %s", fn,
cgraph_inline_failed_string (reason));
The call is using '+F', thus the location is set to some location
related to F, depending on which *_printer function is active at that
moment. cp_printer uses location_of, and default_tree_printer uses
DECL_SOURCE_LOCATION. Is the default_tree_printer always used at this
point? If yes, I completely agree we should use an explicit
DECL_SOURCE_LOCATION. The meaning of '+' is not only opaque but it
breaks #pragma GCC diagnostic.
> Did you investigate the glibc case on whether caller or callee are artificial?
No, I could not get glibc to compile. Unfortunately, the machine of
the compile farm that I use to work on GCC is too old. Installing
locally all up-to-date dependencies would require too much time from
me that is better spent on other things. Nevertheless, printing "cc1:
called from here" is always bogus. Not printing it is better. If we
could print something smarter, that would be perfect, but I don't know
how to do that, so "better" is good enough for me. Would you agree?
Cheers,
Manuel.
