[committed] AArch64 Fix bootstrap failure due to dump_printf_loc format attribute uses [PR106782]

Message ID patch-16190-tamar@arm.com
State Committed
Commit b98c5262d02c13cdbbf3b985859b436adec94d90
Headers
Series [committed] AArch64 Fix bootstrap failure due to dump_printf_loc format attribute uses [PR106782] |

Commit Message

Tamar Christina Sept. 1, 2022, 9:03 p.m. UTC
  Hi All,

This fixes the bootstrap failure on AArch64 following -Werror=format by
correcting the print format modifiers in the backend.

Bootstrapped on aarch64-none-linux-gnu and no issues.

Committed as obvious.

Thanks,
Tamar

gcc/ChangeLog:

	PR other/106782
	* config/aarch64/aarch64.cc
	(aarch64_vector_costs::prefer_unrolled_loop): Replace %u with
	HOST_WIDE_INT_PRINT_UNSIGNED.

--- inline copy of patch -- 
diff --git a/gcc/config/aarch64/aarch64.cc b/gcc/config/aarch64/aarch64.cc
index 4b486aeea90ea2afb9cdd96a4dbe15c5bb2abd7a..f199e77cd4296cd3556641051072dabc9f5e51fa 100644




--
diff --git a/gcc/config/aarch64/aarch64.cc b/gcc/config/aarch64/aarch64.cc
index 4b486aeea90ea2afb9cdd96a4dbe15c5bb2abd7a..f199e77cd4296cd3556641051072dabc9f5e51fa 100644
--- a/gcc/config/aarch64/aarch64.cc
+++ b/gcc/config/aarch64/aarch64.cc
@@ -16671,7 +16671,8 @@ aarch64_vector_costs::prefer_unrolled_loop () const
 
   if (dump_enabled_p ())
     dump_printf_loc (MSG_NOTE, vect_location, "Number of insns in"
-		     " unrolled Advanced SIMD loop = %d\n",
+		     " unrolled Advanced SIMD loop = "
+		     HOST_WIDE_INT_PRINT_UNSIGNED "\n",
 		     m_unrolled_advsimd_stmts);
 
   /* The balance here is tricky.  On the one hand, we can't be sure whether
  

Patch

--- a/gcc/config/aarch64/aarch64.cc
+++ b/gcc/config/aarch64/aarch64.cc
@@ -16671,7 +16671,8 @@  aarch64_vector_costs::prefer_unrolled_loop () const
 
   if (dump_enabled_p ())
     dump_printf_loc (MSG_NOTE, vect_location, "Number of insns in"
-		     " unrolled Advanced SIMD loop = %d\n",
+		     " unrolled Advanced SIMD loop = "
+		     HOST_WIDE_INT_PRINT_UNSIGNED "\n",
 		     m_unrolled_advsimd_stmts);
 
   /* The balance here is tricky.  On the one hand, we can't be sure whether