[PATCH v3 0/3] gas: add command line option to inhibit info messages

[Jan Beulich]

On 10.07.2024 13:26, Matthieu Longo wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> GAS currently emits information messages for context information along warnings. These extra messages might sometimes pollute the test expectations when checking for error message patterns in stderr output.
> 
> This patch aims at providing two new flags while preserving the existing behavior if none of the options is provided.
>   * --info, similar to the existing --warn flag to enable diagnostic information messages (default behavior).
>   * --no-info, similar to the existing --no-warn flag to disable diagnostic information messages.
> 
> It also adds the flags to the existing documentation, and command manual.
> 
> As an example of its benefit, I used the new flag for the system register tests under gas/testsuite/gas/aarch64/sysreg testsuite, and the info message for macro expansion were removed inside the tests expectations.
> 
> Regression tested on aarch64-none-elf, and no regression found.
> 
> Ok for binutils-master?
> 
> Regards,
> Matthieu.
> 
> Changes from v0:
> - reorder warning options
>   https://sourceware.org/pipermail/binutils/2024-June/135232.html
> - rename flag_no_infos to flag_no_information.
> - documentation: move --no-info and --info flags after warnings flags.
> - remove from this patch's scope the tests relying on the line number.
>   add a check in output_info() in AArch64 backend.
>   check flag_no_information flag and quickly return if enabled, as requested in the previous revision's review.
>   https://sourceware.org/pipermail/binutils/2024-June/135231.html
> 
> Changes from v1:
> - move the '--info' section up to respect alphabetical order.

It's at least close to nitpicking, I know, but still: In response to
this change of yours I said that you didn't go far enough with what you
did. I did not ...

> Changes from v2:
> - reorder '--no-info' sections to respect alphabetical order.

... ask for ordering to be done based on the "no-" prefix. The place
I'd look for when wanting to know something info message related would
be at 'i', not 'n'. I'm sorry if this didn't come through clear enough.

The fact that --no-pad-sections lives where it does is, I guess, just
because there's no --pad-sections (for whatever reason).

And again, commenting would have been easier if you sent patches inline,
as then there is context to actually associate a comment with, and it is
also possible to talk in "further up" and "further down" terms.

Jan