public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug c++/102490] Erroneous optimization of default constexpr operator== of struct with bitfields
Date: Wed, 06 Oct 2021 02:41:19 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <bug-102490-4-rag9SfRGIb@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <bug-102490-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102490

--- Comment #6 from CVS Commits <cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
The master branch has been updated by Jason Merrill <jason@gcc.gnu.org>:

https://gcc.gnu.org/g:09d886e671f2230acca082e6579a69b8df8fb202

commit r12-4202-g09d886e671f2230acca082e6579a69b8df8fb202
Author: Jakub Jelinek <jakub@redhat.com>
Date:   Fri Oct 1 17:07:17 2021 +0200

    c++: defaulted <=> with bitfields [PR102490]

    The testcases in the patch are either miscompiled or ICE with checking,
    because the defaulted operator== is synthesized too early (but only if
    constexpr), when the corresponding class type is still incomplete type. 
The
    problem is that at that point the bitfield FIELD_DECLs still have as
    TREE_TYPE their underlying type rather than integral type with their
    precision and when layout_class_type is called for the class soon after
    that, it changes those types but the COMPONENT_REFs type stay the way that
    they were during the operator== synthesize_method type and the middle-end
is
    then upset by the mismatch of types.  As what exact type will be given
isn't
    just a one liner but quite long code especially for over-sized bitfields, I
    think it is best to just not synthesize the comparison operators so early
    and call defaulted_late_check for them once again as soon as the class is
    complete.

    This is also a problem for virtual operator<=>, where we need to compare
the
    noexcept-specifier to validate the override before the class is complete.
    Rather than try to defer that comparison, maybe_instantiate_noexcept now
    calls maybe_synthesize_method, which calls build_comparison_op in
    non-defining mode if the class isn't complete yet.  In that situation we
    also might not have base fields yet, so we look in the binfo for the bases.

    Co-authored-by: Jason Merrill <jason@redhat.com>

    2021-10-01  Jakub Jelinek  <jakub@redhat.com>

            PR c++/98712
            PR c++/102490
            * cp-tree.h (maybe_synthesize_method): Declare.
            * method.c (genericize_spaceship): Use
            LOOKUP_NORMAL | LOOKUP_NONVIRTUAL | LOOKUP_DEFAULTED instead of
            LOOKUP_NORMAL for flags.
            (comp_info): Remove defining member.  Add complain, code, retcat.
            (comp_info::comp_info): Adjust.
            (do_one_comp): Split out from build_comparison_op.   Use
            LOOKUP_NORMAL | LOOKUP_NONVIRTUAL | LOOKUP_DEFAULTED instead of
            LOOKUP_NORMAL for flags.
            (build_comparison_op): Add defining argument. Adjust comp_info
            construction.  Use defining instead of info.defining.  Assert that
            if defining, ctype is a complete type.  Walk base binfos.
            (synthesize_method, maybe_explain_implicit_delete,
            explain_implicit_non_constexpr): Adjust build_comparison_op
callers.
            (maybe_synthesize_method): New function.
            * class.c (check_bases_and_members): Don't call
defaulted_late_check
            for sfk_comparison.
            (finish_struct_1): Call it here instead after class has been
            completed.
            * pt.c (maybe_instantiate_noexcept): Call maybe_synthesize_method
            instead of synthesize_method.

            * g++.dg/cpp2a/spaceship-synth8.C (std::strong_ordering): Provide
            more complete definition.
            (std::strong_ordering::less, std::strong_ordering::equal,
            std::strong_ordering::greater): Define.
            * g++.dg/cpp2a/spaceship-synth12.C: New test.
            * g++.dg/cpp2a/spaceship-synth13.C: New test.
            * g++.dg/cpp2a/spaceship-synth14.C: New test.
            * g++.dg/cpp2a/spaceship-eq11.C: New test.
            * g++.dg/cpp2a/spaceship-eq12.C: New test.
            * g++.dg/cpp2a/spaceship-eq13.C: New test.

  parent reply	other threads:[~2021-10-06  2:41 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2021-09-26 11:31 [Bug c++/102490] New: " luc.briand35 at gmail dot com
2021-09-27 10:16 ` [Bug c++/102490] " jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-09-27 11:33 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-09-27 11:37 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-09-27 12:38 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-10-05 17:15 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-10-06  2:41 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org [this message]
2022-11-03 21:18 ` ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=bug-102490-4-rag9SfRGIb@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/ \
    --to=gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org \
    --cc=gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).