[mpich-devel] [mpich-commits] [mpich] MPICH primary repository branch, master, updated. v3.1-22-gde80ec8

[Lu, Huiwei]

Thanks Dave,

Oops, I let the bug slip in. I will be more careful next time.
—
Huiwei

On Feb 27, 2014, at 1:40 PM, Balaji, Pavan <balaji at anl.gov> wrote:

> 
> And, of course, I totally screwed up the check — it should have been !=, rather than = in the check.
> 
> I take solace in the fact that this is not the worst code I’ve written.  :-)
> 
>  — Pavan
> 
> On Feb 27, 2014, at 1:32 PM, Dave Goodell (dgoodell) <dgoodell at cisco.com> wrote:
> 
>> I saw this fly by and a bug caught the corner of my eye (see inline)
>> 
>> Begin forwarded message:
>> 
>>> From: Service Account <noreply at mpich.org>
>>> Subject: [mpich-commits] [mpich] MPICH primary repository branch, master, updated. v3.1-22-gde80ec8
>>> Date: February 27, 2014 11:27:24 AM PST
>>> To: <all-commits at mpich.org>, <commits at mpich.org>
>>> Reply-To: <commits at mpich.org>
>>> 
>>> This is an automated email from the git hooks/post-receive script. It was
>>> generated because a ref change was pushed to the repository containing
>>> the project "MPICH primary repository".
>>> 
>>> The branch, master has been updated
>>>     via  de80ec8704071f3b9c810509fb8acee345865902 (commit)
>>>    from  956047a2696bdfb51d66f56d0b226df8d40ebd80 (commit)
>>> 
>>> Those revisions listed above that are new to this repository have
>>> not appeared on any other notification email; so we list those
>>> revisions in full, below.
>>> 
>>> - Log -----------------------------------------------------------------
>>> http://git.mpich.org/mpich.git/commitdiff/de80ec8704071f3b9c810509fb8acee345865902
>>> 
>>> commit de80ec8704071f3b9c810509fb8acee345865902
>>> Author: Pavan Balaji <balaji at mcs.anl.gov>
>>> Date:   Wed Feb 26 11:49:46 2014 -0600
>>> 
>>>  Better checks for VA_ARGS.
>>> 
>>>  We were disabling VA_ARGS whenever the compiler throws warnings.
>>>  However, in some cases, the compiler is throwing warnings in general
>>>  (because of bad user-specified flags) and not specifically because of
>>>  VA_ARGS.  See discussion on the discuss at mpich.org mailing list:
>>>  http://lists.mpich.org/pipermail/discuss/2014-February/002246.html
>>> 
>>>  This patch works around this issue by checking the difference in the
>>>  warning flags with and without VA_ARGS.
>>> 
>>>  Fixes #2047.
>>> 
>>>  Signed-off-by: Huiwei Lu <huiweilu at mcs.anl.gov>
>>> 
>>> diff --git a/confdb/aclocal_cc.m4 b/confdb/aclocal_cc.m4
>>> index f73aa4c..2612e94 100644
>>> --- a/confdb/aclocal_cc.m4
>>> +++ b/confdb/aclocal_cc.m4
>>> @@ -1644,22 +1644,35 @@ AC_DEFUN([PAC_C_MACRO_VA_ARGS],[
>>>   AC_MSG_CHECKING([for variable argument list macro functionality])
>>> 
>>>   # check if the program links correctly
>>> -    rm -f pac_test.log
>>> -    PAC_LINK_IFELSE_LOG([pac_test.log],[AC_LANG_PROGRAM([
>>> +    rm -f pac_test1.log pac_test2.log
>>> +
>>> +    PAC_LINK_IFELSE_LOG([pac_test1.log],[AC_LANG_PROGRAM([
>>>       #include <stdio.h>
>>>       #define conftest_va_arg_macro(...) printf(__VA_ARGS__)
>>>   ],
>>>   [conftest_va_arg_macro("a test %d", 3);])],
>>>   prog_links=yes,prog_links=no)
>>> 
>>> +    PAC_LINK_IFELSE_LOG([pac_test2.log],[AC_LANG_PROGRAM([
>>> +        #include <stdio.h>
>>> +        #define conftest_va_arg_macro printf
>>> +    ],
>>> +    [conftest_va_arg_macro("a test %d", 3);])])
>>> +
>>>   # If the program linked OK, make sure there were no warnings
>>> -    if test "$prog_links" = "yes" -a "`cat pac_test.log`" = "" ; then
>>> +    if test "$prog_links" = "yes" -a "`diff pac_test1.log pac_test2.log`" = "" ; then
>>>      AC_DEFINE([HAVE_MACRO_VA_ARGS],[1],[Define if C99-style variable argument list macro functionality])
>>>      AC_MSG_RESULT([yes])
>>> +    elif "`diff pac_test1.log pac_test2.log`" = "" ; then
>> 
>> This is bad shell code.  You probably want "elif test" instead.
>> 
>> -Dave
>> 
>>> +       AC_MSG_RESULT([no, compiler generates warnings])
>>> +       echo "With VA_ARGS:"
>>> +       cat pac_test1.log
>>> +       echo "Without VA_ARGS:"
>>> +       cat pac_test2.log
>>>   else
>>>      AC_MSG_RESULT([no])
>>>   fi
>>> -    rm -f pac_test.log
>>> +    rm -f pac_test1.log pac_test2.log
>>> ])dnl
>>> 
>>> # Will AC_DEFINE([HAVE_BUILTIN_EXPECT]) if the compiler supports __builtin_expect.
>>> 
>>> -----------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> 
>>> Summary of changes:
>>> confdb/aclocal_cc.m4 |   21 +++++++++++++++++----
>>> 1 files changed, 17 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>>> 
>>> 
>>> hooks/post-receive
>>> -- 
>>> MPICH primary repository
>> 
>