Jan Hubicka hubi...@ucw.cz writes:
* gfortran.dg/lto/pr41576_1.f90: Add interface.
* gfortran.dg/lto/pr41521_0.f90: Disable lto-type-mismatch
FAIL: gfortran.dg/lto/pr41521 f_lto_pr41521_0.o assemble, -g -O -flto
-Wno-lto-type-mismatch
FAIL: gfortran.dg/lto/pr41576
On Mon, May 11, 2015 at 6:42 AM, Jan Hubicka hubi...@ucw.cz wrote:
Hi,
this is the updated version of patch with testsuite compensation and
some changes:
- As discussed with Richard on IRC, I added -Wlto-type-mismatch to control
the warnings (enabled by default) and split ODR warnings
Hi,
this is the updated version of patch with testsuite compensation and
some changes:
- As discussed with Richard on IRC, I added -Wlto-type-mismatch to control
the warnings (enabled by default) and split ODR warnings from warnings
about incompatible types (in a sense of weak structural
Only emitting the warnings with -Wodr looks good to me. I can't see
how we can decide what cases lead to wrong code surprises and what not
OK, I will go with -Wodr for all the warnings then, that seems fine to me.
(other than using types_compatible_p ...). Wrong-code can only(?) happen
On Tue, 28 Apr 2015, Jan Hubicka wrote:
Hi,
actually I bootstrapped/regtested without fortran (as I frogot the setting
from
LTO bootstrap). There are several new warnings in the fortran's testsuite.
As far as I can tell, they represent real mismatches. I wonder, do we want
to fix the
On Mon, 27 Apr 2015, Jan Hubicka wrote:
Hi,
this patch strengten ODR checking for requiring match on declarations
(if both of them are defined in C++ tranlsation unit). Currently
ipa-symtab.c will warn only if declarations are incompatible in
useless_type_conversion sense. Now we warn
Hi,
this patch strengten ODR checking for requiring match on declarations
(if both of them are defined in C++ tranlsation unit). Currently
ipa-symtab.c will warn only if declarations are incompatible in
useless_type_conversion sense. Now we warn more often, i.e. in the following
example:
t.C:
Hi,
actually I bootstrapped/regtested without fortran (as I frogot the setting from
LTO bootstrap). There are several new warnings in the fortran's testsuite.
As far as I can tell, they represent real mismatches. I wonder, do we want
to fix the testcases (some fortran-fu would be needed),
Hi all,
Jan Hubicka wrote:
actually I bootstrapped/regtested without fortran (as I frogot the setting from
LTO bootstrap). There are several new warnings in the fortran's testsuite.
As far as I can tell, they represent real mismatches. I wonder, do we want
to fix the testcases (some
