On Sun, Mar 30, 2014 at 9:25 PM, Richard Sandiford
<rdsandif...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> Marek Polacek <pola...@redhat.com> writes:
>> @@ -6666,7 +6666,16 @@ handle_noinline_attribute (tree *node, tree name,
>> int ARG_UNUSED (flags), bool *no_add_attrs)
>> {
>> if (TREE_CODE (*node) == FUNCTION_DECL)
>> - DECL_UNINLINABLE (*node) = 1;
>> + {
>> + if (lookup_attribute ("always_inline", DECL_ATTRIBUTES (*node)))
>> + {
>> + warning (OPT_Wattributes, "%qE attribute ignored due to conflict "
>> + "with %<always_inline%> attribute", name);
>> + *no_add_attrs = true;
>> + }
>> + else
>> + DECL_UNINLINABLE (*node) = 1;
>> + }
>> else
>> {
>> warning (OPT_Wattributes, "%qE attribute ignored", name);
>> @@ -6704,9 +6713,16 @@ handle_always_inline_attribute (tree *node, tree name,
>> {
>> if (TREE_CODE (*node) == FUNCTION_DECL)
>> {
>> - /* Set the attribute and mark it for disregarding inline
>> - limits. */
>> - DECL_DISREGARD_INLINE_LIMITS (*node) = 1;
>> + if (lookup_attribute ("noinline", DECL_ATTRIBUTES (*node)))
>> + {
>> + warning (OPT_Wattributes, "%qE attribute ignored due to conflict "
>> + "with %<noinline%> attribute", name);
>
> Sorry for the nit, but maybe it'd be better to use %qs for the second
> attributes, so that we can use the same translation string for all conflicts.
> Same with the later messages (where the quotes that come with %qs are
> probably needed too).
Good point, patch is pre-approved (also adjusting the two other conflict
warnings to spell out that the attribute is ignored).
Thanks,
Richard.
> Thanks,
> Richard
