On September 5, 2016 7:20:57 PM GMT+02:00, Jakub Jelinek <ja...@redhat.com> wrote: >Hi! > >While it would be perhaps nice to pass explicit location_t in the >target >option handling code, there are hundreds of error/warning/sorry calls >in lots of backends, and lots of those routines are used not just >for the process_options time (i.e. command line options), but also for >pragma GCC target and target option handling, so at least for the time >being >I think it is easier to just use UNKNOWN_LOCATION for the command line >option diagnostics. > >Bootstrapped/regtested on x86_64-linux and i686-linux, ok for trunk?
OK. Thanks, Richard. >2016-09-05 Jakub Jelinek <ja...@redhat.com> > > PR middle-end/77475 > * toplev.c (process_options): Temporarily set input_location > to UNKNOWN_LOCATION around targetm.target_option.override () call. > >--- gcc/toplev.c.jj 2016-09-03 11:18:55.000000000 +0200 >+++ gcc/toplev.c 2016-09-05 15:05:19.819995470 +0200 >@@ -1220,7 +1220,10 @@ process_options (void) > no_backend = lang_hooks.post_options (&main_input_filename); > > /* Some machines may reject certain combinations of options. */ >+ location_t saved_location = input_location; >+ input_location = UNKNOWN_LOCATION; > targetm.target_option.override (); >+ input_location = saved_location; > > if (flag_diagnostics_generate_patch) > global_dc->edit_context_ptr = new edit_context (); > > Jakub
