[Bug bootstrap/105567] New: [13 regression] bootstrap failure on arm due to bogus constructor warning

[Bug bootstrap/105567] New: [13 regression] bootstrap failure on arm due to bogus constructor warning

[rearnsha at gcc dot gnu.org]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105567

            Bug ID: 105567
           Summary: [13 regression] bootstrap failure on arm due to bogus
                    constructor warning
           Product: gcc
           Version: unknown
            Status: UNCONFIRMED
          Severity: normal
          Priority: P3
         Component: bootstrap
          Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
          Reporter: rearnsha at gcc dot gnu.org
  Target Milestone: ---

On arm constructors implicitly return 'this', but this is leading to a boottrap
failure.

Reduced testcase:

typedef unsigned int size_t;
template<typename, typename, typename> struct vec;
template<typename T, size_t N >
class auto_vec : public vec<T, va_heap>
{
  auto_vec (size_t s )
  {
      {
 return;
      }
  }
};
struct function {
  struct control_flow_graph *cfg;
};
struct edge_iterator {
};
struct control_flow_graph {
  int x_n_basic_blocks;
};
bool
mark_dfs_back_edges (struct function *fun)
{
  auto_vec<edge_iterator, 20> stack (((fun)->cfg->x_n_basic_blocks) + 1);
}

Compile with 'cc1plus -march=armv8-a+simd -mfloat-abi=hard -O2 -g -Wall
-fno-exceptions -quiet '

[Bug bootstrap/105567] [13 regression] bootstrap failure on arm due to bogus constructor warning

[jason at gcc dot gnu.org]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105567

Jason Merrill <jason at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
     Ever confirmed|0                           |1
           Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org      |jason at gcc dot gnu.org
   Last reconfirmed|                            |2022-05-11
                 CC|                            |jason at gcc dot gnu.org
             Status|UNCONFIRMED                 |ASSIGNED

[Bug bootstrap/105567] [13 regression] bootstrap failure on arm due to bogus constructor warning

[rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105567

Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
   Target Milestone|---                         |13.0
            Version|unknown                     |13.0

[Bug bootstrap/105567] [13 regression] bootstrap failure on arm due to bogus constructor warning

[cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105567

--- Comment #1 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:4dc86f716fe6087f1cf786d69c0c6f3f5af810f0

commit r13-331-g4dc86f716fe6087f1cf786d69c0c6f3f5af810f0
Author: Jason Merrill <jason@redhat.com>
Date:   Wed May 11 09:44:57 2022 -0400

    c++: fix arm-eabi bootstrap [PR105567]

    Since my r13-112, in the template we were changing 'return' to 'return
this'
    on cdtor_returns_this targets, and then getting confused by that when
    instantiating.  So only make that change at instantiation time.

            PR bootstrap/105567

    gcc/cp/ChangeLog:

            * typeck.cc (check_return_expr): Don't mess with ctor return value
            while parsing a template.

    gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog:

            * g++.dg/template/ctor10.C: New test.

[Bug bootstrap/105567] [13 regression] bootstrap failure on arm due to bogus constructor warning

[jason at gcc dot gnu.org]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105567

Jason Merrill <jason at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|ASSIGNED                    |RESOLVED
         Resolution|---                         |FIXED

--- Comment #2 from Jason Merrill <jason at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Fixed.