From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com [170.10.133.124]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AFE2D3854803 for ; Mon, 31 May 2021 09:15:27 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 sourceware.org AFE2D3854803 Received: from mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (mimecast-mx01.redhat.com [209.132.183.4]) (Using TLS) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP id us-mta-478-pnY5pxZuO6aDt8sw3hkJwQ-1; Mon, 31 May 2021 05:15:25 -0400 X-MC-Unique: pnY5pxZuO6aDt8sw3hkJwQ-1 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx08.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.23]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5154080A5F8; Mon, 31 May 2021 09:15:24 +0000 (UTC) Received: from tucnak.zalov.cz (ovpn-112-147.ams2.redhat.com [10.36.112.147]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DB2F72E058; Mon, 31 May 2021 09:15:23 +0000 (UTC) Received: from tucnak.zalov.cz (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by tucnak.zalov.cz (8.16.1/8.16.1) with ESMTPS id 14V9FLCT2447724 (version=TLSv1.3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Mon, 31 May 2021 11:15:21 +0200 Received: (from jakub@localhost) by tucnak.zalov.cz (8.16.1/8.16.1/Submit) id 14V9FKiQ2447723; Mon, 31 May 2021 11:15:20 +0200 Date: Mon, 31 May 2021 11:15:20 +0200 From: Jakub Jelinek To: Richard Biener Cc: Andrew Pinski , GCC Patches Subject: Re: [PATCH] Fix PR 95481: tail call fails with empty struct types Message-ID: <20210531091520.GM7746@tucnak> Reply-To: Jakub Jelinek References: <1622442625-22583-1-git-send-email-apinski@marvell.com> <20210531082518.GK7746@tucnak> MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.84 on 10.5.11.23 X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH, DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU, DKIM_VALID_EF, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL, SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS, TXREP autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on server2.sourceware.org X-BeenThere: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Gcc-patches mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 31 May 2021 09:15:28 -0000 On Mon, May 31, 2021 at 11:13:22AM +0200, Richard Biener wrote: > On Mon, May 31, 2021 at 10:29 AM Jakub Jelinek via Gcc-patches > wrote: > > > > On Sun, May 30, 2021 at 11:30:25PM -0700, apinski--- via Gcc-patches wrote: > > > +static bool > > > +zero_sized_decl (const_tree decl) > > > +{ > > > + if (!decl) > > > + return true; > > > + > > > + tree type = TREE_TYPE (decl); > > > + if (AGGREGATE_TYPE_P (type) && TYPE_SIZE (type) > > > + && integer_zerop (TYPE_SIZE (type))) > > > > Shouldn't this be instead > > if (AGGREGATE_TYPE_P (type) > > && !TREE_ADDRESSABLE (type) > > && is_empty_type (type)) > > ? > > It shouldn't matter if the type has zero size (e.g. typically in C) or > > non-zero size (typically in C++), but that returning it is a nop, no bits > > need to be copied anywhere. > > But does !TREE_ADDRESSABLE matter? Likely the FEs should pass it by hidden reference in that case already, true. Jakub