[Bug c/32122] indirect goto to an integer accepted

[Bug c/32122] indirect goto to an integer accepted

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32122

Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
           Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org      |pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
             Status|NEW                         |ASSIGNED

--- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Mine, I have a patch.

[Bug c/32122] indirect goto to an integer accepted

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32122

--- Comment #5 from Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Created attachment 51472
  --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=51472&action=edit
Patch which I am testing

It passes all of gcc.dg/dg.exp I am doing a full bootstrap/test right now.

[Bug c/32122] indirect goto to an integer accepted

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32122

Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
           Keywords|                            |patch
                URL|                            |https://gcc.gnu.org/piperma
                   |                            |il/gcc-patches/2021-Septemb
                   |                            |er/579792.html

--- Comment #6 from Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Patch finally submitted:
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2021-September/579792.html

[Bug c/32122] indirect goto to an integer accepted

[cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32122

--- Comment #7 from CVS Commits <cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
The trunk branch has been updated by Andrew Pinski <pinskia@gcc.gnu.org>:

https://gcc.gnu.org/g:e12f66d96fe41c8ef8a0d01b6a8394cd6bce3978

commit r12-3947-ge12f66d96fe41c8ef8a0d01b6a8394cd6bce3978
Author: Andrew Pinski <apinski@marvell.com>
Date:   Fri Sep 17 04:59:03 2021 +0000

    c: [PR32122] Require pointer types for computed gotos

    So GCC has always accepted non-pointer types in computed gotos but
    that was wrong based on the documentation:
    Any expression of type void * is allowed.

    So this fixes the problem by requiring the type to
    be a pointer type.

    OK? Bootstrapped and tested on x86_64-linux-gnu with no regressions.

            PR c/32122

    gcc/c/ChangeLog:

            * c-parser.c (c_parser_statement_after_labels): Pass
            the c_expr instead of the tree to c_finish_goto_ptr.
            * c-typeck.c (c_finish_goto_ptr): Change the second
            argument type to c_expr.
            * c-tree.h (c_finish_goto_ptr): Likewise.
            Error out if the expression was not of a pointer type.

    gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog:

            * gcc.dg/comp-goto-5.c: New test.
            * gcc.dg/comp-goto-6.c: New test.

[Bug c/32122] indirect goto to an integer accepted

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32122

Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
         Resolution|---                         |FIXED
   Target Milestone|---                         |12.0
             Status|ASSIGNED                    |RESOLVED

--- Comment #8 from Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Fixed.

[Bug c/32122] indirect goto to an integer accepted

[sjackman at gmail dot com]

------- Comment #2 from sjackman at gmail dot com  2007-11-23 17:30 -------
I've always used `goto *123;' on embedded targets as a feature to be able to
jump to a constant address. This particularly useful feature should not be
removed. Is a simple change of syntax being suggested, such as `goto *(void
*)123;'? Dereferencing a void pointer looks strange to me, but I guess no
stranger than dereferencing an integer.


-- 

sjackman at gmail dot com changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |sjackman at gmail dot com


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32122

[Bug c/32122] indirect goto to an integer accepted

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org]

------- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org  2007-06-10 02:21 -------
Confirmed, not a regression as far as the eyes can see.


-- 

pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|UNCONFIRMED                 |NEW
     Ever Confirmed|0                           |1
           Keywords|                            |accepts-invalid
      Known to fail|                            |2.95.3 3.0.4 3.2.3 3.3.3
                   |                            |3.4.0 4.0.0 4.1.0
   Last reconfirmed|0000-00-00 00:00:00         |2007-06-10 02:21:55
               date|                            |
            Summary|invalid indirect goto       |indirect goto to an integer
                   |accepted                    |accepted


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32122