* Re: [PATCH] PR/68089: C++-11: Ingore "alignas(0)".
2016-01-04 11:34 ` Dominik Vogt
@ 2016-01-04 16:55 ` Martin Sebor
2016-02-05 16:29 ` [PING, PATCH] " Dominik Vogt
` (6 subsequent siblings)
7 siblings, 0 replies; 13+ messages in thread
From: Martin Sebor @ 2016-01-04 16:55 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: vogt; +Cc: gcc-patches, Andreas Krebbel
On 01/04/2016 04:33 AM, Dominik Vogt wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 01, 2016 at 05:53:08PM -0700, Martin Sebor wrote:
>> On 12/31/2015 04:50 AM, Dominik Vogt wrote:
>>> The attached patch fixes C++-11 handling of "alignas(0)" which
>>> should be ignored but currently generates an error message. A
>>> test case is included; the patch has been tested on S390x. Since
>>> it's a language issue it should be independent of the backend
>>> used.
>>
>> The patch doesn't handle value-dependent expressions(*).
>
>> It
>> seems that the problem is in handle_aligned_attribute() calling
>> check_user_alignment() with the second argument (ALLOW_ZERO)
>> set to false. Calling it with true fixes the problem and handles
>> value-dependent expressions (I haven't done any more testing beyond
>> that).
>
> Like the attached patch? (Passes the testsuite on s390x.)
Yes, like that (though someone other than me needs to approve
your patch).
>
> But wouldn't an "aligned" attribute be added, allowing the backend
> to possibly generate an error or a warning?
AFAICS, both the C and C++ front ends ignore the attribute
when check_user_alignment() returns -1 (either on error or
when the requested alignment is zero and ALLOW_ZERO is true).
Martin
PS I wonder what it is about this thread that makes my email
client (Thunderbird) include only gcc-patches and krebbel
when I hit Reply All and not you. (I had to manually add
your email.) It looks like your reply back to me did the
same thing.
Martin
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* Re: [PING, PATCH] PR/68089: C++-11: Ingore "alignas(0)".
2016-01-04 11:34 ` Dominik Vogt
2016-01-04 16:55 ` Martin Sebor
@ 2016-02-05 16:29 ` Dominik Vogt
2016-02-22 11:57 ` [PING 2, " Dominik Vogt
` (5 subsequent siblings)
7 siblings, 0 replies; 13+ messages in thread
From: Dominik Vogt @ 2016-02-05 16:29 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-patches; +Cc: Andreas Krebbel, Martin Sebor
Can this be approved?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69089
On Mon, Jan 04, 2016 at 12:33:21PM +0100, Dominik Vogt wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 01, 2016 at 05:53:08PM -0700, Martin Sebor wrote:
> > On 12/31/2015 04:50 AM, Dominik Vogt wrote:
> > >The attached patch fixes C++-11 handling of "alignas(0)" which
> > >should be ignored but currently generates an error message. A
> > >test case is included; the patch has been tested on S390x. Since
> > >it's a language issue it should be independent of the backend
> > >used.
> >
> > The patch doesn't handle value-dependent expressions(*).
>
> > It
> > seems that the problem is in handle_aligned_attribute() calling
> > check_user_alignment() with the second argument (ALLOW_ZERO)
> > set to false. Calling it with true fixes the problem and handles
> > value-dependent expressions (I haven't done any more testing beyond
> > that).
>
> Like the attached patch? (Passes the testsuite on s390x.)
>
> But wouldn't an "aligned" attribute be added, allowing the backend
> to possibly generate an error or a warning?
> gcc/c-family/ChangeLog
>
> PR/69089
> * c-common.c (handle_aligned_attribute): Allow 0 as an argument to the
> "aligned" attribute.
>
> gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog
>
> PR/69089
> * g++.dg/cpp0x/alignas5.C: New test.
> >From 2461293b9070da74950fd0ae055d1239cc69ce67 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: Dominik Vogt <vogt@de.ibm.com>
> Date: Wed, 30 Dec 2015 15:08:52 +0100
> Subject: [PATCH] C++-11: Ingore "alignas(0)" instead of generating an
> error message.
>
> This is required by the C++-11 standard.
> ---
> gcc/c-family/c-common.c | 2 +-
> gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp0x/alignas5.C | 29 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> 2 files changed, 30 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> create mode 100644 gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp0x/alignas5.C
>
> diff --git a/gcc/c-family/c-common.c b/gcc/c-family/c-common.c
> index 653d1dc..9eb25a9 100644
> --- a/gcc/c-family/c-common.c
> +++ b/gcc/c-family/c-common.c
> @@ -7804,7 +7804,7 @@ handle_aligned_attribute (tree *node, tree ARG_UNUSED (name), tree args,
> else if (TYPE_P (*node))
> type = node, is_type = 1;
>
> - if ((i = check_user_alignment (align_expr, false)) == -1
> + if ((i = check_user_alignment (align_expr, true)) == -1
> || !check_cxx_fundamental_alignment_constraints (*node, i, flags))
> *no_add_attrs = true;
> else if (is_type)
> diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp0x/alignas5.C b/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp0x/alignas5.C
> new file mode 100644
> index 0000000..f3252a9
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp0x/alignas5.C
> @@ -0,0 +1,29 @@
> +// PR c++/69089
> +// { dg-do compile { target c++11 } }
> +// { dg-options "-Wno-attributes" }
> +
> +alignas (0) int valid1;
> +alignas (1 - 1) int valid2;
> +struct Tvalid
> +{
> + alignas (0) int i;
> + alignas (2 * 0) int j;
> +};
> +
> +alignas (-1) int invalid1; /* { dg-error "not a positive power of 2" } */
> +alignas (1 - 2) int invalid2; /* { dg-error "not a positive power of 2" } */
> +struct Tinvalid
> +{
> + alignas (-1) int i; /* { dg-error "not a positive power of 2" } */
> + alignas (2 * 0 - 1) int j; /* { dg-error "not a positive power of 2" } */
> +};
> +
> +template <int N> struct TNvalid1 { alignas (N) int i; };
> +TNvalid1<0> SNvalid1;
> +template <int N> struct TNvalid2 { alignas (N) int i; };
> +TNvalid2<1 - 1> SNvalid2;
> +
> +template <int N> struct TNinvalid1 { alignas (N) int i; }; /* { dg-error "not a positive power of 2" } */
> +TNinvalid1<-1> SNinvalid1;
> +template <int N> struct TNinvalid2 { alignas (N) int i; }; /* { dg-error "not a positive power of 2" } */
> +TNinvalid2<1 - 2> SNinvalid2;
> --
> 2.3.0
>
Ciao
Dominik ^_^ ^_^
--
Dominik Vogt
IBM Germany
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* Re: [PING 2, PATCH] PR/68089: C++-11: Ingore "alignas(0)".
2016-01-04 11:34 ` Dominik Vogt
2016-01-04 16:55 ` Martin Sebor
2016-02-05 16:29 ` [PING, PATCH] " Dominik Vogt
@ 2016-02-22 11:57 ` Dominik Vogt
2016-03-02 6:36 ` [PING 3, " Dominik Vogt
` (4 subsequent siblings)
7 siblings, 0 replies; 13+ messages in thread
From: Dominik Vogt @ 2016-02-22 11:57 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-patches; +Cc: Andreas Krebbel
On Mon, Jan 04, 2016 at 12:33:21PM +0100, Dominik Vogt wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 01, 2016 at 05:53:08PM -0700, Martin Sebor wrote:
> > On 12/31/2015 04:50 AM, Dominik Vogt wrote:
> > >The attached patch fixes C++-11 handling of "alignas(0)" which
> > >should be ignored but currently generates an error message. A
> > >test case is included; the patch has been tested on S390x. Since
> > >it's a language issue it should be independent of the backend
> > >used.
> >
> > The patch doesn't handle value-dependent expressions(*).
>
> > It
> > seems that the problem is in handle_aligned_attribute() calling
> > check_user_alignment() with the second argument (ALLOW_ZERO)
> > set to false. Calling it with true fixes the problem and handles
> > value-dependent expressions (I haven't done any more testing beyond
> > that).
>
> Like the attached patch? (Passes the testsuite on s390x.)
>
> But wouldn't an "aligned" attribute be added, allowing the backend
> to possibly generate an error or a warning?
>
> > Also, in the test, I noticed the definition of the first struct
> > is missing the terminating semicolon.
>
> Yeah.
> gcc/c-family/ChangeLog
>
> PR/69089
> * c-common.c (handle_aligned_attribute): Allow 0 as an argument to the
> "aligned" attribute.
>
> gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog
>
> PR/69089
> * g++.dg/cpp0x/alignas5.C: New test.
> >From 2461293b9070da74950fd0ae055d1239cc69ce67 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: Dominik Vogt <vogt@de.ibm.com>
> Date: Wed, 30 Dec 2015 15:08:52 +0100
> Subject: [PATCH] C++-11: Ingore "alignas(0)" instead of generating an
> error message.
>
> This is required by the C++-11 standard.
> ---
> gcc/c-family/c-common.c | 2 +-
> gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp0x/alignas5.C | 29 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> 2 files changed, 30 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> create mode 100644 gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp0x/alignas5.C
>
> diff --git a/gcc/c-family/c-common.c b/gcc/c-family/c-common.c
> index 653d1dc..9eb25a9 100644
> --- a/gcc/c-family/c-common.c
> +++ b/gcc/c-family/c-common.c
> @@ -7804,7 +7804,7 @@ handle_aligned_attribute (tree *node, tree ARG_UNUSED (name), tree args,
> else if (TYPE_P (*node))
> type = node, is_type = 1;
>
> - if ((i = check_user_alignment (align_expr, false)) == -1
> + if ((i = check_user_alignment (align_expr, true)) == -1
> || !check_cxx_fundamental_alignment_constraints (*node, i, flags))
> *no_add_attrs = true;
> else if (is_type)
> diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp0x/alignas5.C b/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp0x/alignas5.C
> new file mode 100644
> index 0000000..f3252a9
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp0x/alignas5.C
> @@ -0,0 +1,29 @@
> +// PR c++/69089
> +// { dg-do compile { target c++11 } }
> +// { dg-options "-Wno-attributes" }
> +
> +alignas (0) int valid1;
> +alignas (1 - 1) int valid2;
> +struct Tvalid
> +{
> + alignas (0) int i;
> + alignas (2 * 0) int j;
> +};
> +
> +alignas (-1) int invalid1; /* { dg-error "not a positive power of 2" } */
> +alignas (1 - 2) int invalid2; /* { dg-error "not a positive power of 2" } */
> +struct Tinvalid
> +{
> + alignas (-1) int i; /* { dg-error "not a positive power of 2" } */
> + alignas (2 * 0 - 1) int j; /* { dg-error "not a positive power of 2" } */
> +};
> +
> +template <int N> struct TNvalid1 { alignas (N) int i; };
> +TNvalid1<0> SNvalid1;
> +template <int N> struct TNvalid2 { alignas (N) int i; };
> +TNvalid2<1 - 1> SNvalid2;
> +
> +template <int N> struct TNinvalid1 { alignas (N) int i; }; /* { dg-error "not a positive power of 2" } */
> +TNinvalid1<-1> SNinvalid1;
> +template <int N> struct TNinvalid2 { alignas (N) int i; }; /* { dg-error "not a positive power of 2" } */
> +TNinvalid2<1 - 2> SNinvalid2;
> --
> 2.3.0
>
Ciao
Dominik ^_^ ^_^
--
Dominik Vogt
IBM Germany
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* Re: [PING 3, PATCH] PR/68089: C++-11: Ingore "alignas(0)".
2016-01-04 11:34 ` Dominik Vogt
` (2 preceding siblings ...)
2016-02-22 11:57 ` [PING 2, " Dominik Vogt
@ 2016-03-02 6:36 ` Dominik Vogt
2016-03-15 6:12 ` [PING 4, " Dominik Vogt
` (3 subsequent siblings)
7 siblings, 0 replies; 13+ messages in thread
From: Dominik Vogt @ 2016-03-02 6:36 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-patches; +Cc: Andreas Krebbel
On Mon, Jan 04, 2016 at 12:33:21PM +0100, Dominik Vogt wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 01, 2016 at 05:53:08PM -0700, Martin Sebor wrote:
> > On 12/31/2015 04:50 AM, Dominik Vogt wrote:
> > >The attached patch fixes C++-11 handling of "alignas(0)" which
> > >should be ignored but currently generates an error message. A
> > >test case is included; the patch has been tested on S390x. Since
> > >it's a language issue it should be independent of the backend
> > >used.
> >
> > The patch doesn't handle value-dependent expressions(*).
>
> > It
> > seems that the problem is in handle_aligned_attribute() calling
> > check_user_alignment() with the second argument (ALLOW_ZERO)
> > set to false. Calling it with true fixes the problem and handles
> > value-dependent expressions (I haven't done any more testing beyond
> > that).
>
> Like the attached patch? (Passes the testsuite on s390x.)
>
> But wouldn't an "aligned" attribute be added, allowing the backend
> to possibly generate an error or a warning?
>
> > Also, in the test, I noticed the definition of the first struct
> > is missing the terminating semicolon.
>
> Yeah.
> gcc/c-family/ChangeLog
>
> PR/69089
> * c-common.c (handle_aligned_attribute): Allow 0 as an argument to the
> "aligned" attribute.
>
> gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog
>
> PR/69089
> * g++.dg/cpp0x/alignas5.C: New test.
> >From 2461293b9070da74950fd0ae055d1239cc69ce67 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: Dominik Vogt <vogt@de.ibm.com>
> Date: Wed, 30 Dec 2015 15:08:52 +0100
> Subject: [PATCH] C++-11: Ingore "alignas(0)" instead of generating an
> error message.
>
> This is required by the C++-11 standard.
> ---
> gcc/c-family/c-common.c | 2 +-
> gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp0x/alignas5.C | 29 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> 2 files changed, 30 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> create mode 100644 gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp0x/alignas5.C
>
> diff --git a/gcc/c-family/c-common.c b/gcc/c-family/c-common.c
> index 653d1dc..9eb25a9 100644
> --- a/gcc/c-family/c-common.c
> +++ b/gcc/c-family/c-common.c
> @@ -7804,7 +7804,7 @@ handle_aligned_attribute (tree *node, tree ARG_UNUSED (name), tree args,
> else if (TYPE_P (*node))
> type = node, is_type = 1;
>
> - if ((i = check_user_alignment (align_expr, false)) == -1
> + if ((i = check_user_alignment (align_expr, true)) == -1
> || !check_cxx_fundamental_alignment_constraints (*node, i, flags))
> *no_add_attrs = true;
> else if (is_type)
> diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp0x/alignas5.C b/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp0x/alignas5.C
> new file mode 100644
> index 0000000..f3252a9
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp0x/alignas5.C
> @@ -0,0 +1,29 @@
> +// PR c++/69089
> +// { dg-do compile { target c++11 } }
> +// { dg-options "-Wno-attributes" }
> +
> +alignas (0) int valid1;
> +alignas (1 - 1) int valid2;
> +struct Tvalid
> +{
> + alignas (0) int i;
> + alignas (2 * 0) int j;
> +};
> +
> +alignas (-1) int invalid1; /* { dg-error "not a positive power of 2" } */
> +alignas (1 - 2) int invalid2; /* { dg-error "not a positive power of 2" } */
> +struct Tinvalid
> +{
> + alignas (-1) int i; /* { dg-error "not a positive power of 2" } */
> + alignas (2 * 0 - 1) int j; /* { dg-error "not a positive power of 2" } */
> +};
> +
> +template <int N> struct TNvalid1 { alignas (N) int i; };
> +TNvalid1<0> SNvalid1;
> +template <int N> struct TNvalid2 { alignas (N) int i; };
> +TNvalid2<1 - 1> SNvalid2;
> +
> +template <int N> struct TNinvalid1 { alignas (N) int i; }; /* { dg-error "not a positive power of 2" } */
> +TNinvalid1<-1> SNinvalid1;
> +template <int N> struct TNinvalid2 { alignas (N) int i; }; /* { dg-error "not a positive power of 2" } */
> +TNinvalid2<1 - 2> SNinvalid2;
> --
> 2.3.0
>
Ciao
Dominik ^_^ ^_^
--
Dominik Vogt
IBM Germany
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* Re: [PING 4, PATCH] PR/68089: C++-11: Ingore "alignas(0)".
2016-01-04 11:34 ` Dominik Vogt
` (3 preceding siblings ...)
2016-03-02 6:36 ` [PING 3, " Dominik Vogt
@ 2016-03-15 6:12 ` Dominik Vogt
2016-04-05 9:43 ` [PING 5, " Dominik Vogt
` (2 subsequent siblings)
7 siblings, 0 replies; 13+ messages in thread
From: Dominik Vogt @ 2016-03-15 6:12 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-patches; +Cc: Andreas Krebbel
On Mon, Jan 04, 2016 at 12:33:21PM +0100, Dominik Vogt wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 01, 2016 at 05:53:08PM -0700, Martin Sebor wrote:
> > On 12/31/2015 04:50 AM, Dominik Vogt wrote:
> > >The attached patch fixes C++-11 handling of "alignas(0)" which
> > >should be ignored but currently generates an error message. A
> > >test case is included; the patch has been tested on S390x. Since
> > >it's a language issue it should be independent of the backend
> > >used.
> >
> > The patch doesn't handle value-dependent expressions(*).
>
> > It
> > seems that the problem is in handle_aligned_attribute() calling
> > check_user_alignment() with the second argument (ALLOW_ZERO)
> > set to false. Calling it with true fixes the problem and handles
> > value-dependent expressions (I haven't done any more testing beyond
> > that).
>
> Like the attached patch? (Passes the testsuite on s390x.)
>
> But wouldn't an "aligned" attribute be added, allowing the backend
> to possibly generate an error or a warning?
>
> > Also, in the test, I noticed the definition of the first struct
> > is missing the terminating semicolon.
>
> Yeah.
> gcc/c-family/ChangeLog
>
> PR/69089
> * c-common.c (handle_aligned_attribute): Allow 0 as an argument to the
> "aligned" attribute.
>
> gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog
>
> PR/69089
> * g++.dg/cpp0x/alignas5.C: New test.
> >From 2461293b9070da74950fd0ae055d1239cc69ce67 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: Dominik Vogt <vogt@de.ibm.com>
> Date: Wed, 30 Dec 2015 15:08:52 +0100
> Subject: [PATCH] C++-11: Ingore "alignas(0)" instead of generating an
> error message.
>
> This is required by the C++-11 standard.
> ---
> gcc/c-family/c-common.c | 2 +-
> gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp0x/alignas5.C | 29 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> 2 files changed, 30 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> create mode 100644 gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp0x/alignas5.C
>
> diff --git a/gcc/c-family/c-common.c b/gcc/c-family/c-common.c
> index 653d1dc..9eb25a9 100644
> --- a/gcc/c-family/c-common.c
> +++ b/gcc/c-family/c-common.c
> @@ -7804,7 +7804,7 @@ handle_aligned_attribute (tree *node, tree ARG_UNUSED (name), tree args,
> else if (TYPE_P (*node))
> type = node, is_type = 1;
>
> - if ((i = check_user_alignment (align_expr, false)) == -1
> + if ((i = check_user_alignment (align_expr, true)) == -1
> || !check_cxx_fundamental_alignment_constraints (*node, i, flags))
> *no_add_attrs = true;
> else if (is_type)
> diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp0x/alignas5.C b/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp0x/alignas5.C
> new file mode 100644
> index 0000000..f3252a9
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp0x/alignas5.C
> @@ -0,0 +1,29 @@
> +// PR c++/69089
> +// { dg-do compile { target c++11 } }
> +// { dg-options "-Wno-attributes" }
> +
> +alignas (0) int valid1;
> +alignas (1 - 1) int valid2;
> +struct Tvalid
> +{
> + alignas (0) int i;
> + alignas (2 * 0) int j;
> +};
> +
> +alignas (-1) int invalid1; /* { dg-error "not a positive power of 2" } */
> +alignas (1 - 2) int invalid2; /* { dg-error "not a positive power of 2" } */
> +struct Tinvalid
> +{
> + alignas (-1) int i; /* { dg-error "not a positive power of 2" } */
> + alignas (2 * 0 - 1) int j; /* { dg-error "not a positive power of 2" } */
> +};
> +
> +template <int N> struct TNvalid1 { alignas (N) int i; };
> +TNvalid1<0> SNvalid1;
> +template <int N> struct TNvalid2 { alignas (N) int i; };
> +TNvalid2<1 - 1> SNvalid2;
> +
> +template <int N> struct TNinvalid1 { alignas (N) int i; }; /* { dg-error "not a positive power of 2" } */
> +TNinvalid1<-1> SNinvalid1;
> +template <int N> struct TNinvalid2 { alignas (N) int i; }; /* { dg-error "not a positive power of 2" } */
> +TNinvalid2<1 - 2> SNinvalid2;
> --
> 2.3.0
>
Ciao
Dominik ^_^ ^_^
--
Dominik Vogt
IBM Germany
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* Re: [PING 5, PATCH] PR/68089: C++-11: Ingore "alignas(0)".
2016-01-04 11:34 ` Dominik Vogt
` (4 preceding siblings ...)
2016-03-15 6:12 ` [PING 4, " Dominik Vogt
@ 2016-04-05 9:43 ` Dominik Vogt
2016-04-28 3:46 ` Jeff Law
2016-04-12 9:04 ` [PING 6, " Dominik Vogt
2016-04-27 7:35 ` [PING 7, " Dominik Vogt
7 siblings, 1 reply; 13+ messages in thread
From: Dominik Vogt @ 2016-04-05 9:43 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-patches; +Cc: Andreas Krebbel
On Mon, Jan 04, 2016 at 12:33:21PM +0100, Dominik Vogt wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 01, 2016 at 05:53:08PM -0700, Martin Sebor wrote:
> > On 12/31/2015 04:50 AM, Dominik Vogt wrote:
> > >The attached patch fixes C++-11 handling of "alignas(0)" which
> > >should be ignored but currently generates an error message. A
> > >test case is included; the patch has been tested on S390x. Since
> > >it's a language issue it should be independent of the backend
> > >used.
> >
> > The patch doesn't handle value-dependent expressions(*).
>
> > It
> > seems that the problem is in handle_aligned_attribute() calling
> > check_user_alignment() with the second argument (ALLOW_ZERO)
> > set to false. Calling it with true fixes the problem and handles
> > value-dependent expressions (I haven't done any more testing beyond
> > that).
>
> Like the attached patch? (Passes the testsuite on s390x.)
>
> But wouldn't an "aligned" attribute be added, allowing the backend
> to possibly generate an error or a warning?
>
> > Also, in the test, I noticed the definition of the first struct
> > is missing the terminating semicolon.
>
> Yeah.
> gcc/c-family/ChangeLog
>
> PR/69089
> * c-common.c (handle_aligned_attribute): Allow 0 as an argument to the
> "aligned" attribute.
>
> gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog
>
> PR/69089
> * g++.dg/cpp0x/alignas5.C: New test.
> >From 2461293b9070da74950fd0ae055d1239cc69ce67 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: Dominik Vogt <vogt@de.ibm.com>
> Date: Wed, 30 Dec 2015 15:08:52 +0100
> Subject: [PATCH] C++-11: Ingore "alignas(0)" instead of generating an
> error message.
>
> This is required by the C++-11 standard.
> ---
> gcc/c-family/c-common.c | 2 +-
> gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp0x/alignas5.C | 29 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> 2 files changed, 30 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> create mode 100644 gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp0x/alignas5.C
>
> diff --git a/gcc/c-family/c-common.c b/gcc/c-family/c-common.c
> index 653d1dc..9eb25a9 100644
> --- a/gcc/c-family/c-common.c
> +++ b/gcc/c-family/c-common.c
> @@ -7804,7 +7804,7 @@ handle_aligned_attribute (tree *node, tree ARG_UNUSED (name), tree args,
> else if (TYPE_P (*node))
> type = node, is_type = 1;
>
> - if ((i = check_user_alignment (align_expr, false)) == -1
> + if ((i = check_user_alignment (align_expr, true)) == -1
> || !check_cxx_fundamental_alignment_constraints (*node, i, flags))
> *no_add_attrs = true;
> else if (is_type)
> diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp0x/alignas5.C b/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp0x/alignas5.C
> new file mode 100644
> index 0000000..f3252a9
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp0x/alignas5.C
> @@ -0,0 +1,29 @@
> +// PR c++/69089
> +// { dg-do compile { target c++11 } }
> +// { dg-options "-Wno-attributes" }
> +
> +alignas (0) int valid1;
> +alignas (1 - 1) int valid2;
> +struct Tvalid
> +{
> + alignas (0) int i;
> + alignas (2 * 0) int j;
> +};
> +
> +alignas (-1) int invalid1; /* { dg-error "not a positive power of 2" } */
> +alignas (1 - 2) int invalid2; /* { dg-error "not a positive power of 2" } */
> +struct Tinvalid
> +{
> + alignas (-1) int i; /* { dg-error "not a positive power of 2" } */
> + alignas (2 * 0 - 1) int j; /* { dg-error "not a positive power of 2" } */
> +};
> +
> +template <int N> struct TNvalid1 { alignas (N) int i; };
> +TNvalid1<0> SNvalid1;
> +template <int N> struct TNvalid2 { alignas (N) int i; };
> +TNvalid2<1 - 1> SNvalid2;
> +
> +template <int N> struct TNinvalid1 { alignas (N) int i; }; /* { dg-error "not a positive power of 2" } */
> +TNinvalid1<-1> SNinvalid1;
> +template <int N> struct TNinvalid2 { alignas (N) int i; }; /* { dg-error "not a positive power of 2" } */
> +TNinvalid2<1 - 2> SNinvalid2;
> --
> 2.3.0
>
Ciao
Dominik ^_^ ^_^
--
Dominik Vogt
IBM Germany
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* Re: [PING 5, PATCH] PR/68089: C++-11: Ingore "alignas(0)".
2016-04-05 9:43 ` [PING 5, " Dominik Vogt
@ 2016-04-28 3:46 ` Jeff Law
0 siblings, 0 replies; 13+ messages in thread
From: Jeff Law @ 2016-04-28 3:46 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: vogt, gcc-patches, Andreas Krebbel
On 04/05/2016 03:43 AM, Dominik Vogt wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 04, 2016 at 12:33:21PM +0100, Dominik Vogt wrote:
>> On Fri, Jan 01, 2016 at 05:53:08PM -0700, Martin Sebor wrote:
>>> On 12/31/2015 04:50 AM, Dominik Vogt wrote:
>>>> The attached patch fixes C++-11 handling of "alignas(0)" which
>>>> should be ignored but currently generates an error message. A
>>>> test case is included; the patch has been tested on S390x. Since
>>>> it's a language issue it should be independent of the backend
>>>> used.
>>>
>>> The patch doesn't handle value-dependent expressions(*).
>>
>>> It
>>> seems that the problem is in handle_aligned_attribute() calling
>>> check_user_alignment() with the second argument (ALLOW_ZERO)
>>> set to false. Calling it with true fixes the problem and handles
>>> value-dependent expressions (I haven't done any more testing beyond
>>> that).
>>
>> Like the attached patch? (Passes the testsuite on s390x.)
>>
>> But wouldn't an "aligned" attribute be added, allowing the backend
>> to possibly generate an error or a warning?
>>
>>> Also, in the test, I noticed the definition of the first struct
>>> is missing the terminating semicolon.
>>
>> Yeah.
>
>> gcc/c-family/ChangeLog
>>
>> PR/69089
>> * c-common.c (handle_aligned_attribute): Allow 0 as an argument to the
>> "aligned" attribute.
>>
>> gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog
>>
>> PR/69089
>> * g++.dg/cpp0x/alignas5.C: New test.
OK for the trunk.
jeff
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* Re: [PING 6, PATCH] PR/68089: C++-11: Ingore "alignas(0)".
2016-01-04 11:34 ` Dominik Vogt
` (5 preceding siblings ...)
2016-04-05 9:43 ` [PING 5, " Dominik Vogt
@ 2016-04-12 9:04 ` Dominik Vogt
2016-04-27 7:35 ` [PING 7, " Dominik Vogt
7 siblings, 0 replies; 13+ messages in thread
From: Dominik Vogt @ 2016-04-12 9:04 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-patches; +Cc: Andreas Krebbel
On Mon, Jan 04, 2016 at 12:33:21PM +0100, Dominik Vogt wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 01, 2016 at 05:53:08PM -0700, Martin Sebor wrote:
> > On 12/31/2015 04:50 AM, Dominik Vogt wrote:
> > >The attached patch fixes C++-11 handling of "alignas(0)" which
> > >should be ignored but currently generates an error message. A
> > >test case is included; the patch has been tested on S390x. Since
> > >it's a language issue it should be independent of the backend
> > >used.
> >
> > The patch doesn't handle value-dependent expressions(*).
>
> > It
> > seems that the problem is in handle_aligned_attribute() calling
> > check_user_alignment() with the second argument (ALLOW_ZERO)
> > set to false. Calling it with true fixes the problem and handles
> > value-dependent expressions (I haven't done any more testing beyond
> > that).
>
> Like the attached patch? (Passes the testsuite on s390x.)
>
> But wouldn't an "aligned" attribute be added, allowing the backend
> to possibly generate an error or a warning?
>
> > Also, in the test, I noticed the definition of the first struct
> > is missing the terminating semicolon.
>
> Yeah.
> gcc/c-family/ChangeLog
>
> PR/69089
> * c-common.c (handle_aligned_attribute): Allow 0 as an argument to the
> "aligned" attribute.
>
> gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog
>
> PR/69089
> * g++.dg/cpp0x/alignas5.C: New test.
> >From 2461293b9070da74950fd0ae055d1239cc69ce67 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: Dominik Vogt <vogt@de.ibm.com>
> Date: Wed, 30 Dec 2015 15:08:52 +0100
> Subject: [PATCH] C++-11: Ingore "alignas(0)" instead of generating an
> error message.
>
> This is required by the C++-11 standard.
> ---
> gcc/c-family/c-common.c | 2 +-
> gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp0x/alignas5.C | 29 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> 2 files changed, 30 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> create mode 100644 gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp0x/alignas5.C
>
> diff --git a/gcc/c-family/c-common.c b/gcc/c-family/c-common.c
> index 653d1dc..9eb25a9 100644
> --- a/gcc/c-family/c-common.c
> +++ b/gcc/c-family/c-common.c
> @@ -7804,7 +7804,7 @@ handle_aligned_attribute (tree *node, tree ARG_UNUSED (name), tree args,
> else if (TYPE_P (*node))
> type = node, is_type = 1;
>
> - if ((i = check_user_alignment (align_expr, false)) == -1
> + if ((i = check_user_alignment (align_expr, true)) == -1
> || !check_cxx_fundamental_alignment_constraints (*node, i, flags))
> *no_add_attrs = true;
> else if (is_type)
> diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp0x/alignas5.C b/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp0x/alignas5.C
> new file mode 100644
> index 0000000..f3252a9
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp0x/alignas5.C
> @@ -0,0 +1,29 @@
> +// PR c++/69089
> +// { dg-do compile { target c++11 } }
> +// { dg-options "-Wno-attributes" }
> +
> +alignas (0) int valid1;
> +alignas (1 - 1) int valid2;
> +struct Tvalid
> +{
> + alignas (0) int i;
> + alignas (2 * 0) int j;
> +};
> +
> +alignas (-1) int invalid1; /* { dg-error "not a positive power of 2" } */
> +alignas (1 - 2) int invalid2; /* { dg-error "not a positive power of 2" } */
> +struct Tinvalid
> +{
> + alignas (-1) int i; /* { dg-error "not a positive power of 2" } */
> + alignas (2 * 0 - 1) int j; /* { dg-error "not a positive power of 2" } */
> +};
> +
> +template <int N> struct TNvalid1 { alignas (N) int i; };
> +TNvalid1<0> SNvalid1;
> +template <int N> struct TNvalid2 { alignas (N) int i; };
> +TNvalid2<1 - 1> SNvalid2;
> +
> +template <int N> struct TNinvalid1 { alignas (N) int i; }; /* { dg-error "not a positive power of 2" } */
> +TNinvalid1<-1> SNinvalid1;
> +template <int N> struct TNinvalid2 { alignas (N) int i; }; /* { dg-error "not a positive power of 2" } */
> +TNinvalid2<1 - 2> SNinvalid2;
> --
> 2.3.0
>
Ciao
Dominik ^_^ ^_^
--
Dominik Vogt
IBM Germany
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* Re: [PING 7, PATCH] PR/68089: C++-11: Ingore "alignas(0)".
2016-01-04 11:34 ` Dominik Vogt
` (6 preceding siblings ...)
2016-04-12 9:04 ` [PING 6, " Dominik Vogt
@ 2016-04-27 7:35 ` Dominik Vogt
7 siblings, 0 replies; 13+ messages in thread
From: Dominik Vogt @ 2016-04-27 7:35 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-patches; +Cc: Andreas Krebbel
On Mon, Jan 04, 2016 at 12:33:21PM +0100, Dominik Vogt wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 01, 2016 at 05:53:08PM -0700, Martin Sebor wrote:
> > On 12/31/2015 04:50 AM, Dominik Vogt wrote:
> > >The attached patch fixes C++-11 handling of "alignas(0)" which
> > >should be ignored but currently generates an error message. A
> > >test case is included; the patch has been tested on S390x. Since
> > >it's a language issue it should be independent of the backend
> > >used.
> >
> > The patch doesn't handle value-dependent expressions(*).
>
> > It
> > seems that the problem is in handle_aligned_attribute() calling
> > check_user_alignment() with the second argument (ALLOW_ZERO)
> > set to false. Calling it with true fixes the problem and handles
> > value-dependent expressions (I haven't done any more testing beyond
> > that).
>
> Like the attached patch? (Passes the testsuite on s390x.)
>
> But wouldn't an "aligned" attribute be added, allowing the backend
> to possibly generate an error or a warning?
>
> > Also, in the test, I noticed the definition of the first struct
> > is missing the terminating semicolon.
>
> Yeah.
> gcc/c-family/ChangeLog
>
> PR/69089
> * c-common.c (handle_aligned_attribute): Allow 0 as an argument to the
> "aligned" attribute.
>
> gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog
>
> PR/69089
> * g++.dg/cpp0x/alignas5.C: New test.
> >From 2461293b9070da74950fd0ae055d1239cc69ce67 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: Dominik Vogt <vogt@de.ibm.com>
> Date: Wed, 30 Dec 2015 15:08:52 +0100
> Subject: [PATCH] C++-11: Ingore "alignas(0)" instead of generating an
> error message.
>
> This is required by the C++-11 standard.
> ---
> gcc/c-family/c-common.c | 2 +-
> gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp0x/alignas5.C | 29 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> 2 files changed, 30 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> create mode 100644 gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp0x/alignas5.C
>
> diff --git a/gcc/c-family/c-common.c b/gcc/c-family/c-common.c
> index 653d1dc..9eb25a9 100644
> --- a/gcc/c-family/c-common.c
> +++ b/gcc/c-family/c-common.c
> @@ -7804,7 +7804,7 @@ handle_aligned_attribute (tree *node, tree ARG_UNUSED (name), tree args,
> else if (TYPE_P (*node))
> type = node, is_type = 1;
>
> - if ((i = check_user_alignment (align_expr, false)) == -1
> + if ((i = check_user_alignment (align_expr, true)) == -1
> || !check_cxx_fundamental_alignment_constraints (*node, i, flags))
> *no_add_attrs = true;
> else if (is_type)
> diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp0x/alignas5.C b/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp0x/alignas5.C
> new file mode 100644
> index 0000000..f3252a9
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp0x/alignas5.C
> @@ -0,0 +1,29 @@
> +// PR c++/69089
> +// { dg-do compile { target c++11 } }
> +// { dg-options "-Wno-attributes" }
> +
> +alignas (0) int valid1;
> +alignas (1 - 1) int valid2;
> +struct Tvalid
> +{
> + alignas (0) int i;
> + alignas (2 * 0) int j;
> +};
> +
> +alignas (-1) int invalid1; /* { dg-error "not a positive power of 2" } */
> +alignas (1 - 2) int invalid2; /* { dg-error "not a positive power of 2" } */
> +struct Tinvalid
> +{
> + alignas (-1) int i; /* { dg-error "not a positive power of 2" } */
> + alignas (2 * 0 - 1) int j; /* { dg-error "not a positive power of 2" } */
> +};
> +
> +template <int N> struct TNvalid1 { alignas (N) int i; };
> +TNvalid1<0> SNvalid1;
> +template <int N> struct TNvalid2 { alignas (N) int i; };
> +TNvalid2<1 - 1> SNvalid2;
> +
> +template <int N> struct TNinvalid1 { alignas (N) int i; }; /* { dg-error "not a positive power of 2" } */
> +TNinvalid1<-1> SNinvalid1;
> +template <int N> struct TNinvalid2 { alignas (N) int i; }; /* { dg-error "not a positive power of 2" } */
> +TNinvalid2<1 - 2> SNinvalid2;
> --
> 2.3.0
>
Ciao
Dominik ^_^ ^_^
--
Dominik Vogt
IBM Germany
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread