From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-446189-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: (qmail 693 invoked by alias); 13 Mar 2014 14:05:24 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 660 invoked by uid 48); 13 Mar 2014 14:05:20 -0000
From: "jakub at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug middle-end/36282] [4.7/4.8/4.9 Regression] Spurious warning "asm declaration ignored due to conflict with previous rename"
Date: Thu, 13 Mar 2014 14:05:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: middle-end
X-Bugzilla-Version: 4.2.1
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: wrong-code
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: NEW
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: 4.7.4
X-Bugzilla-Flags:
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: cc attachments.created
Message-ID: <bug-36282-4-TXy7PuqsmX@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-36282-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-36282-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Bugzilla-URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-SW-Source: 2014-03/txt/msg01058.txt.bz2

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36282

Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |jakub at gcc dot gnu.org

--- Comment #7 from Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Created attachment 32345
  --> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=32345&action=edit
gcc49-pr36282.patch

Untested fix.  If this turns out to be too expensive (though, I think #pragma
weak is rare and the patch should at most double the time to compute
DECL_ASSEMBLER_NAME), perhaps we could use some spare bit in decl_with_vis to
mean DECL_ASSEMBLER_NAME_SET_P (in addition to the current two tests).  Then we
could keep the computed assembler name cached and still pretend the name has
not been set, decl_assembler_name would set that bit.  We'd need to handle with
care the cases when the bit is unset and say we rename the symbol though, then
of course we'd need to first SET_DECL_ASSEMBLER_NAME to NULL.