Re: [PATCH] Fix PR49718 : allow no_instrument_function attribute in class member definition/declaration

[Jeff Law <law@redhat.com>]

On 01/09/14 07:17, Laurent Alfonsi wrote:
> On 01/09/14 06:02, Jeff Law wrote:
>> On 01/08/14 02:05, Laurent Alfonsi wrote:
>>>       All,
>>>
>>> I was looking at PR49718. I have enclosed a simple fix for this bug
>>> report.
>>>
>>> 2014-01-07  Laurent Alfonsi <laurent.alfonsi@st.com>
>>>
>>>       * c-family/c-common.c
>>> (handle_no_instrument_function_attribute): Allow
>>>         no_instrument_function attribute in class member
>>> definition/declaration.
>>>
>>>
>>> Looking at the implementation of the function attributes, I see no
>>> reason anymore to keep this error message.
>>> Let me know if I missed something.
>>> I have also added a testcase in the enclosed patch.
>>>
>>> 2014-01-07  Laurent Alfonsi <laurent.alfonsi@st.com>
>>>
>>>       PR c++/49718
>>>       * g++.dg/pr49718.C: New
>> Isn't the idea here that if we've already generated the function body
>> (presumably with instrumentation) that a no-instrument attribute
>> appearing on a later declaration won't do anything useful?
>>
>> jeff
>>
>>
> Jeff,
>
> You are right. That's probably the reason.
>  From what i can see, the code instrumentation is performed in the
> gimplification pass (gimplify_function_tree), and the function attribute
> is handled and attached earlier in the parsing phase.
>
> I ve checked with an example like :
> ---8<------8<------8<------8<------8<---
> int foo () {
>    return 2;
> }
>
> int bar () {
>    return 1;
> }
>
> int foo () __attribute__((no_instrument_function));
> ---8<------8<------8<------8<------8<---
> The attribute is well honored on foo function.
> I might need to add this test case too.
Thanks.  I checked with Jakub and he confirmed that all the flags to 
disable unit-at-a-time mode are gone and there's no way to generate 
gimple for a function prior to parsing the entire TU.

That means this patch should be OK.   I don't see you in the MAINTAINERS 
file or with an account on gcc.gnu.org, so I'll check it in for you shortly.

Thanks for your patience,

Jeff