On Thu, Nov 23, 2023 at 07:22:58PM +0100, Florian Weimer wrote: > * Marek Polacek: > > > On Mon, Nov 20, 2023 at 10:56:30AM +0100, Florian Weimer wrote: > >> gcc/ > >> > >> * doc/invoke.texi (Warning Options): Document changes. > > > > That's pretty vague :). How about "Document that -Wreturn-mismatch is a > > permerror in C99."? > > Applied (with “in C99 and later”). > > >> * gcc.target/powerpc/conditional-return.c: Compile with > >> -fpermissive due to expected -Wreturn-mismatch error. > > > > There seem to be some extra whitespaces after "expected". > > Fixed. > > >> @@ -7375,7 +7376,10 @@ Attempting to use the return value of a > >> non-@code{void} function other > >> than @code{main} that flows off the end by reaching the closing curly > >> brace that terminates the function is undefined. > >> > >> -This warning is specific to C and enabled by default. > >> +This warning is specific to C and enabled by default. In C99 and later > >> +language dialects, it is treated as an error. It an be downgraded > > > > an -> can > > Fixed. > > >> diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/powerpc/conditional-return.c > >> b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/powerpc/conditional-return.c > >> index 6b3ef5f52ca..c6491216752 100644 > >> --- a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/powerpc/conditional-return.c > >> +++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/powerpc/conditional-return.c > >> @@ -1,7 +1,7 @@ > >> /* Check that a conditional return is used. */ > >> > >> /* { dg-do compile } */ > >> -/* { dg-options "-O2 -w" } */ > >> +/* { dg-options "-O2 -fpermissive -w" } */ > >> > >> /* { dg-final { scan-assembler {\mbeqlr\M} } } */ > >> > > > > These seem fine. > > > > Should we have a test for -Wno-error=return-mismatch and > > -Wno-return-mismatch? > > I didn't see those. > > See gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/permerror-noerror.c and > gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/permerror-nowarning.c. They don't show up in the > patch because the diagnostics don't change.
Ah, I see that now. This patch is OK then. Thanks. Marek