Re: More informative ODR warnings

2014-07-13 Thread Jan Hubicka
> Hi Honzo, Nazdar Geralde, > > On Sun, 13 Jul 2014, Jan Hubicka wrote: > > +@opindex Wodr > > +@opindex Wno-odr > > +@opindex Wodr > > +Warn about One Definition Rule violations during link time optimization. > > +Require @option{-flto-odr-type-merging} to be enabled. Enabled by default > > here

Re: More informative ODR warnings

2014-07-13 Thread Gerald Pfeifer
Hi Honzo, On Sun, 13 Jul 2014, Jan Hubicka wrote: > +@opindex Wodr > +@opindex Wno-odr > +@opindex Wodr > +Warn about One Definition Rule violations during link time optimization. > +Require @option{-flto-odr-type-merging} to be enabled. Enabled by default here in invoke.texi you talk about One D

Re: More informative ODR warnings

2014-07-13 Thread Jan Hubicka
Hi, this is version after taking into account all the feedback. I reformulated the warnings on fields and methods to show the type first and then inform about mismatching elements. On mainline (without ODR type merging) there are no warnings on libxul, but there are few others during Firefox buil

Re: More informative ODR warnings

2014-07-03 Thread Manuel López-Ibáñez
+@opindex Wodr +@opindex Wno-odr +@opindex Wodr +Warn about One Definition Rule violations during link time optimization. +Require @option{-flto-odr-type-merging} to be enabled. Enabled by default Duplicated @opindex Wodr. (@item is missing) "Requires". Period after "default" But according to cur

Re: More informative ODR warnings

2014-07-02 Thread Jason Merrill
On 07/02/2014 03:34 PM, Trevor Saunders wrote: On Wed, Jul 02, 2014 at 09:28:03PM +0200, Jan Hubicka wrote: it seems to me this doesn't get at the real issue that the type names are the same but the fields are different. maybe "a type of the same name with different fields defined here"? This

Re: More informative ODR warnings

2014-07-02 Thread Trevor Saunders
On Wed, Jul 02, 2014 at 09:28:03PM +0200, Jan Hubicka wrote: > > > > I can't find the code for the SampleFormat thing, but the rest of them > > look like ODR violations to me. > > I think it is some define renaming the field, I was also puzled by this one. > > > > > /aux/hubicka/firefox/netwerk/

Re: More informative ODR warnings

2014-07-02 Thread Jan Hubicka
> > I can't find the code for the SampleFormat thing, but the rest of them > look like ODR violations to me. I think it is some define renaming the field, I was also puzled by this one. > > > /aux/hubicka/firefox/netwerk/sctp/datachannel/DataChannel.h:64:0: warning: > > field ‘mSpa’ (of type ‘s

Re: More informative ODR warnings

2014-07-02 Thread Trevor Saunders
On Wed, Jul 02, 2014 at 05:15:20PM +0200, Jan Hubicka wrote: > Hi, > this patch adds structural comparsion into ODR warnings, so we do not rely > on types_compatible_p to checks if the individual variants of same > name looks same. This allows us to give more precise reason for the > mismatch and

Re: More informative ODR warnings

2014-07-02 Thread Jan Hubicka
> On Jul 2, 2014, at 10:52 AM, Nathan Froyd wrote: > > - Original Message - > >> /aux/hubicka/firefox/netwerk/sctp/datachannel/DataChannel.h:64:0: warning: > >> field ‘mSpa’ (of type ‘struct BufferedMsg’) violates one definition rule > >> [-Wodr] > > > > Can we reword this warning? The "

Re: More informative ODR warnings

2014-07-02 Thread Mike Stump
On Jul 2, 2014, at 10:52 AM, Nathan Froyd wrote: > - Original Message - >> /aux/hubicka/firefox/netwerk/sctp/datachannel/DataChannel.h:64:0: warning: >> field ‘mSpa’ (of type ‘struct BufferedMsg’) violates one definition rule >> [-Wodr] > > Can we reword this warning? The "of type 'struc

Re: More informative ODR warnings

2014-07-02 Thread Nathan Froyd
- Original Message - > /aux/hubicka/firefox/netwerk/sctp/datachannel/DataChannel.h:64:0: warning: > field ‘mSpa’ (of type ‘struct BufferedMsg’) violates one definition rule > [-Wodr] Can we reword this warning? The "of type 'struct BufferedMsg'" could be easily taken to mean that the typ