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 ESMTPS id 9FCDD3858D20 for ; Tue, 22 Nov 2022 12:21:07 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.1 sourceware.org 9FCDD3858D20 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=redhat.com Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=redhat.com DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1669119667; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type; bh=8r5RHu1SnM1hfWvLDcpEet36M2l9buH8sAByEZ1O+4Y=; b=F1j3jWuTc9fjbSjuS3qWUQ/W0NRMMVUXxXpb1B7dPgZJikxO+qYXS0C84050sq7EI8W+CN cOOwiyJCrZmG33gUpJ+qmVZVHvmXS401nBK8buuHPX5ikVrHDZlwLEszaCd5KX8D7ZuQSo oCHuv+9L2zk9ZZRF7r4XMSoUVKIwchw= Received: from mimecast-mx02.redhat.com (mimecast-mx02.redhat.com [66.187.233.88]) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP with STARTTLS (version=TLSv1.2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id us-mta-540--vV3iLDJMfGj_e7YCBjW7g-1; Tue, 22 Nov 2022 07:21:06 -0500 X-MC-Unique: -vV3iLDJMfGj_e7YCBjW7g-1 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx01.intmail.prod.int.rdu2.redhat.com [10.11.54.1]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mimecast-mx02.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CC76785A59D for ; Tue, 22 Nov 2022 12:21:05 +0000 (UTC) Received: from oldenburg.str.redhat.com (unknown [10.2.16.18]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4BC1140C835A for ; Tue, 22 Nov 2022 12:21:05 +0000 (UTC) From: Florian Weimer To: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [PATCH] c: Propagate erroneous types to declaration specifiers [PR107805] Date: Tue, 22 Nov 2022 13:21:01 +0100 Message-ID: <87cz9fqixe.fsf@oldenburg.str.redhat.com> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.2 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 3.1 on 10.11.54.1 X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com Content-Type: text/plain X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.5 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,DKIM_VALID_EF,GIT_PATCH_0,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_NONE,TXREP autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on server2.sourceware.org List-Id: Without this change, finish_declspecs cannot tell that whether there was an erroneous type specified, or no type at all. This may result in additional diagnostics for implicit ints, or missing diagnostics for multiple types. PR c/107805 gcc/c/ * c-decl.cc (declspecs_add_type): Propagate error_mark_bode from type to specs. gcc/testsuite/ * gcc.dg/pr107805-1.c: New test. * gcc.dg/pr107805-1.c: Likewise. --- Note regarding testing: I boostrap with c,c++,lto on x86-64 (non-multlib) and diffed these .sum files: gcc/testsuite/gcc/gcc.sum gcc/testsuite/g++/g++.sum x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/libgomp/testsuite/libgomp.sum x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/libstdc++-v3/testsuite/libstdc++.sum x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/libatomic/testsuite/libatomic.sum x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/libitm/testsuite/libitm.sum Apart from timestamps, the only differences I get is this change: --- ./gcc/testsuite/gcc/gcc.sum 2022-11-22 05:45:33.813264761 -0500 +++ /tmp/b/build/./gcc/testsuite/gcc/gcc.sum 2022-11-22 06:39:10.667590185 -0500 @@ -83303,6 +83303,11 @@ PASS: gcc.dg/pr107618.c (test for bogus messages, line 9) PASS: gcc.dg/pr107618.c (test for excess errors) PASS: gcc.dg/pr107686.c (test for excess errors) +PASS: gcc.dg/pr107805-1.c (test for errors, line 3) +PASS: gcc.dg/pr107805-1.c (test for excess errors) +PASS: gcc.dg/pr107805-2.c (test for errors, line 3) +PASS: gcc.dg/pr107805-2.c (test for errors, line 4) +PASS: gcc.dg/pr107805-2.c (test for excess errors) PASS: gcc.dg/pr11459-1.c (test for excess errors) PASS: gcc.dg/pr11492.c (test for bogus messages, line 8) PASS: gcc.dg/pr11492.c (test for excess errors) @@ -190486,7 +190491,7 @@ === gcc Summary === -# of expected passes 185932 +# of expected passes 185937 # of unexpected failures 99 # of unexpected successes 20 # of expected failures 1484 So I think this means there are no test suite regressions. Thanks, Florian gcc/c/c-decl.cc | 6 ++---- gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/pr107805-1.c | 5 +++++ gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/pr107805-2.c | 4 ++++ 3 files changed, 11 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) diff --git a/gcc/c/c-decl.cc b/gcc/c/c-decl.cc index 098e475f65d..4adb89e4aaf 100644 --- a/gcc/c/c-decl.cc +++ b/gcc/c/c-decl.cc @@ -12243,11 +12243,9 @@ declspecs_add_type (location_t loc, struct c_declspecs *specs, error_at (loc, "two or more data types in declaration specifiers"); else if (TREE_CODE (type) == TYPE_DECL) { - if (TREE_TYPE (type) == error_mark_node) - ; /* Allow the type to default to int to avoid cascading errors. */ - else + specs->type = TREE_TYPE (type); + if (TREE_TYPE (type) != error_mark_node) { - specs->type = TREE_TYPE (type); specs->decl_attr = DECL_ATTRIBUTES (type); specs->typedef_p = true; specs->explicit_signed_p = C_TYPEDEF_EXPLICITLY_SIGNED (type); diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/pr107805-1.c b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/pr107805-1.c new file mode 100644 index 00000000000..559b6a5586e --- /dev/null +++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/pr107805-1.c @@ -0,0 +1,5 @@ +/* { dg-do compile } */ +typedef int t; +typedef struct { double a; int b; } t; /* { dg-error "conflicting types" } */ +t x; /* No warning here. */ + diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/pr107805-2.c b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/pr107805-2.c new file mode 100644 index 00000000000..fa5fa4ce273 --- /dev/null +++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/pr107805-2.c @@ -0,0 +1,4 @@ +/* { dg-do compile } */ +typedef int t; +typedef struct { double a; int b; } t; /* { dg-error "conflicting types" } */ +t char x; /* { dg-error "two or more data types" } */ base-commit: e4faee8d02ec5d65bf418612f7181823eb08c078