On Tue, Oct 20, 2015 at 15:54:45 -0400, Nathan Sidwell wrote:
> @@ -1209,16 +1209,11 @@ input_overwrite_node (struct lto_file_de
>
> if (!success)
> {
> - if (flag_openacc)
> - {
> - if (TREE_CODE (node->decl) == FUNCTION_DECL)
> - error ("Missing routine function %<%s%>", node->name ());
> - else
> - error ("Missing declared variable %<%s%>", node->name ());
> - }
> -
> + gcc_assert (flag_openacc);
> + if (TREE_CODE (node->decl) == FUNCTION_DECL)
> + error ("missing OpenACC %<routine%> function %qD", node->decl);
> else
> - gcc_unreachable ();
> + error ("missing OpenACC %<declare%> variable %qD", node->decl);
> }
> }
There might be a situation when some func or var is lost during regular LTO,
even if flag_openacc is present. In this case "missing OpenACC ..." message
would be wrong. And if flag_openacc is absent, gcc_assert (flag_openacc) is a
bit confusing. We disscussed this with Cesar here:
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2015-07/msg02076.html
-- Ilya
