From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: by sourceware.org (Postfix, from userid 48)
 id 10CAD3858006; Tue, 17 Nov 2020 22:19:33 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 10CAD3858006
From: "jsm28 at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug c/97882] [8/9/10/11 Regression] Segmentation Fault on improper
 redeclaration of function
Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2020 22:19:32 +0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: c
X-Bugzilla-Version: 10.2.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: 
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: jsm28 at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: NEW
X-Bugzilla-Resolution: 
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: 8.5
X-Bugzilla-Flags: 
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: cf_reconfirmed_on target_milestone bug_status
 short_desc everconfirmed
Message-ID: <bug-97882-4-DzgLbdeMbZ@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-97882-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-97882-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Bugzilla-URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-BeenThere: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Gcc-bugs mailing list <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://gcc.gnu.org/mailman/options/gcc-bugs>,
 <mailto:gcc-bugs-request@gcc.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-request@gcc.gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://gcc.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gcc-bugs>,
 <mailto:gcc-bugs-request@gcc.gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2020 22:19:33 -0000

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D97882

Joseph S. Myers <jsm28 at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
   Last reconfirmed|                            |2020-11-17
   Target Milestone|---                         |8.5
             Status|UNCONFIRMED                 |NEW
            Summary|Segmentation Fault on       |[8/9/10/11 Regression]
                   |improper redeclaration of   |Segmentation Fault on
                   |function                    |improper redeclaration of
                   |                            |function
     Ever confirmed|0                           |1

--- Comment #1 from Joseph S. Myers <jsm28 at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Looks like a regression in GCC 7 relative to GCC 6.  Whether this code is v=
alid
or invalid GNU C is a tricky question, but I'm inclined to say that when the
incomplete enum type extension is used, we should *not* count such enums as
compatible with unsigned int since we don't know what members the enum will
have once completed.  So, for example, I think we ought to reject

extern enum foo *x;
unsigned int *x;

and certainly ought to reject

extern enum foo *x;
unsigned int *x;
enum foo { A =3D -1 };

where the enum ends up compatible with int rather than unsigned int.  (But a
patch involving rejecting such code might not be such a good idea for
backporting, given the risk of breaking user programs that build OK with the
release branch compilers.)

(A C11 defect fix incorporated in C17 means a qualifier on a function return
type is ignored, so whether the code is valid is not affected by the "const=
" in
the original test case.)=