On 27 September 2016 at 20:38, Jeff Law <l...@redhat.com> wrote: > On 09/27/2016 10:39 AM, James Greenhalgh wrote: >> >> On Tue, Sep 27, 2016 at 04:40:22PM +0530, Senthil Kumar Selvaraj wrote: >>> >>> Hi, >>> >>> This patch requires int32plus for >>> gcc.dg/tree-ssa/builtin-sprintf-warn-1.c, as it reports a bunch of >>> failures for a 16 bit int target like the avr. The "%u" format >>> specifier tests, for example, use int literals big enough to only fit >>> in a long int, and this causes unexpected warnings. >>> >>> Comitted to trunk. >> >> >> This change is obviously incomplete as it does not update the expected >> line numbers for warnings generated by this testcase. > > Right. > > It does make me wonder if these directives could go at the bottom of the > file so that adding/removing a directive doesn't require updating line #s in > the file. > > jeff >
I did observe regressions too, on aarch64: - PASS now FAIL [PASS => FAIL]: gcc.dg/tree-ssa/builtin-sprintf-warn-1.c (nil) (test for warnings, line 96) gcc.dg/tree-ssa/builtin-sprintf-warn-1.c (test for excess errors) gcc.dg/tree-ssa/builtin-sprintf-warn-1.c Glibc %p (test for warnings, line 108) Christophe
