On Mon, 2017-12-11 at 09:51 -0700, Martin Sebor wrote: > Bug 83369 - Missing diagnostics during inlining, notes that when > -Wnonnull is issued for an inlined call to a built-in function, > GCC doesn't print the inlining stack, making it hard to debug > where the problem comes from. > > When the -Wnonnull warning was introduced into the middle-end > the diagnostic machinery provided no way to print the inlining > stack (analogous to %K for trees). Since then GCC has gained > support for the %G directive which does just that. The attached > patch makes use of the directive to print the inlining context > for -Wnonnull. > > The patch doesn't include a test because the DejaGnu framework > provides no mechanism to validate this part of GCC output (see > also bug 83336). > > Tested on x86_64-linux with no regressions. > > Martin
I'm wondering if we should eliminate %K and %G altogether, and make tree-diagnostic.c and friends automatically print the inlining stack -they just need a location_t (the issue is with system headers, I suppose, but maybe we can just make that smarter: perhaps only suppress if every location in the chain is in a system header?). I wonder if that would be GCC 9 material at this point though? Coming back to this patch: regarding tests, would you be able to use the techniques of: https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2017-12/msg00646.html to build a test case? Dave
