On Mon, Sep 11, 2023 at 11:11:30PM +0200, Jakub Jelinek via Gcc-patches wrote: > On Mon, Sep 11, 2023 at 07:27:57PM +0200, Benjamin Priour via Gcc-patches > wrote: > > Thanks for the report, > > > > After investigation it seems the location of the new dejagnu directive for > > C++ differs depending on the configuration. > > The expected warning is still emitted, but its location differ slightly. > > I expect it to be not an issue per se of the analyzer, but a divergence in > > the FE between the two configurations. > > I think the divergence is whether called_by_test_5b returns the struct > in registers or in memory. If in memory (like in the x86_64 -m32 case), we > have > [compound-assignment-1.c:71:21] D.3191 = called_by_test_5b (); [return slot > optimization] > [compound-assignment-1.c:71:21 discrim 1] D.3191 ={v} {CLOBBER(eol)}; > [compound-assignment-1.c:72:1] return; > in the IL, while if in registers (like x86_64 -m64 case), just > [compound-assignment-1.c:71:21] D.3591 = called_by_test_5b (); > [compound-assignment-1.c:72:1] return; > > If you just want to avoid the differences, putting } on the same line as the > call might be a usable workaround for that.
Here is the workaround in patch form. Tested on x86_64-linux -m32/-m64, ok for trunk? 2023-09-12 Jakub Jelinek <ja...@redhat.com> PR testsuite/111377 * c-c++-common/analyzer/compound-assignment-1.c (test_5b): Move closing } to the same line as the call to work-around differences in diagnostics line. --- gcc/testsuite/c-c++-common/analyzer/compound-assignment-1.c.jj 2023-09-11 11:05:47.523727789 +0200 +++ gcc/testsuite/c-c++-common/analyzer/compound-assignment-1.c 2023-09-12 08:58:52.854231161 +0200 @@ -68,5 +68,8 @@ called_by_test_5b (void) void test_5b (void) { - called_by_test_5b (); -} /* { dg-warning "leak of '<anonymous>.ptr_wrapper::ptr'" "" { target c++ } } */ + called_by_test_5b (); } +/* { dg-warning "leak of '<anonymous>.ptr_wrapper::ptr'" "" { target c++ } .-1 } */ +/* The closing } above is intentionally on the same line as the call, because + otherwise the exact line of the diagnostics depends on whether the + called_by_test_5b () call satisfies aggregate_value_p or not. */ Jakub