Thank you very much Jakub.
-Aditya
> Date: Thu, 7 May 2015 19:58:11 +0200
> From: ja...@redhat.com
> To: hiradi...@msn.com
> CC: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
> Subject: Re: Fix compiler warnings
>
> On Wed, May 06, 2015 at 04:37:49PM
On Wed, May 06, 2015 at 04:37:49PM +, Aditya K wrote:
> Thanks! Updated patch.
>
>
> 2015-05-06 Aditya Kumar
>
> * gcov-tool.c (do_merge): Refactored to remove int ret.
> * ipa-icf.c (sem_item::hash_referenced_symbol_properties): Changed
> (!type == FUNC) to (type != FUNC
On Wed, May 06, 2015 at 06:18:23PM +0200, Marek Polacek wrote:
> On Wed, May 06, 2015 at 04:58:03PM +0200, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> > Also, it would be nice to figure why gcc doesn't warn (for both meaningful
> > changes, in the first snippet I believe gcc just determines the static
> > function is n
d, 6 May 2015 18:26:10 +0200
> From: ja...@redhat.com
> To: hiradi...@msn.com
> CC: rdsandif...@googlemail.com; pola...@redhat.com; gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
> Subject: Re: Fix compiler warnings
>
> On Wed, May 06, 2015 at 04:22:13PM +, Aditya K wrote:
>> Thanks Richard
On Wed, May 06, 2015 at 04:22:13PM +, Aditya K wrote:
> Thanks Richard, Jakub and Trevor for the feedback. I have reformatted the
> changelog, and modified the patch addressing your comments.
>
> -Aditya
>
>
> 2015-05-06 Aditya Kumar
>
> * gcov-tool.c (do_merge):
> * ipa
On Wed, May 06, 2015 at 06:18:23PM +0200, Marek Polacek wrote:
> On Wed, May 06, 2015 at 04:58:03PM +0200, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> > Also, it would be nice to figure why gcc doesn't warn (for both meaningful
> > changes, in the first snippet I believe gcc just determines the static
> > function is n
On Wed, May 06, 2015 at 04:58:03PM +0200, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> Also, it would be nice to figure why gcc doesn't warn (for both meaningful
> changes, in the first snippet I believe gcc just determines the static
> function is noreturn and that is why it correctly doesn't warn).
> I thought Marek h
Jakub Jelinek writes:
> Hi!
>
> See Trevor's comments on ChangeLog.
>
> diff --git a/gcc/reload.h b/gcc/reload.h
> index c777e54..ae86150 100644
> --- a/gcc/reload.h
> +++ b/gcc/reload.h
> @@ -168,7 +168,7 @@ struct target_reload {
> value indicates the level of indirect addressing supported
Hi!
See Trevor's comments on ChangeLog.
diff --git a/gcc/reload.h b/gcc/reload.h
index c777e54..ae86150 100644
--- a/gcc/reload.h
+++ b/gcc/reload.h
@@ -168,7 +168,7 @@ struct target_reload {
value indicates the level of indirect addressing supported, e.g., two
means that (MEM (MEM (R
On Wed, May 06, 2015 at 01:47:38PM +, Aditya K wrote:
> I recently compiled gcc with clang and found few useful warnings
> (https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2015-05/msg00015.html,
> https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2015-05/msg00041.html).
> I have a patch to fix some of those, it passes bootstrap, please
ok for google/main.
David
http://codereview.appspot.com/5483046/
11 matches
Mail list logo
