From: Dave Korn <dave.korn.cygwin@gmail.com>
To: "gcc@gcc.gnu.org" <gcc@gcc.gnu.org>, GCC Java <java@gcc.gnu.org>
Subject: Tree checking failure in jc1
Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2010 20:25:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4D02925F.2030900@gmail.com> (raw)
Hi lists,
I found a couple of new FAILs in my latest libjava testrun:
> FAIL: newarray_overflow -O3 compilation from source
> FAIL: newarray_overflow -O3 -findirect-dispatch compilation from source
These turn out to be tree checking failures:
> In file included from <built-in>:3:0:
> newarray_overflow.java:20:0: internal compiler error: tree check: expected class
> 'type', have 'declaration' (function_decl) in put_decl_node, at java/lang.c:405
... happening ...
> /* Append to decl_buf a printable name for NODE.
> Depending on VERBOSITY, more information about NODE
> is printed. Read the comments of decl_printable_name in
> langhooks.h for more. */
>
> static void
> put_decl_node (tree node, int verbosity)
> {
> int was_pointer = 0;
> if (TREE_CODE (node) == POINTER_TYPE)
> {
> node = TREE_TYPE (node);
> was_pointer = 1;
> }
> if (DECL_P (node) && DECL_NAME (node) != NULL_TREE)
> {
> if (TREE_CODE (node) == FUNCTION_DECL)
> {
> if (verbosity == 0 && DECL_NAME (node))
> /* We have been instructed to just print the bare name
> of the function. */
> {
> put_decl_node (DECL_NAME (node), 0);
> return;
> }
>
> /* We want to print the type the DECL belongs to. We don't do
> that when we handle constructors. */
> if (! DECL_CONSTRUCTOR_P (node)
> && ! DECL_ARTIFICIAL (node) && DECL_CONTEXT (node)
> /* We want to print qualified DECL names only
> if verbosity is higher than 1. */
> && verbosity >= 1)
> {
> put_decl_node (TYPE_NAME (DECL_CONTEXT (node)),
> verbosity);
... here: ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
The decl pointed to by 'node' is a function_decl for a builtin:
<function_decl 0x7ff8f580 __builtin_prefetch
type <function_type 0x7fe52ee0
type <void_type 0x7ff608a0 void asm_written VOID
align 1 symtab 0 alias set -1 canonical type 0x7ff608a0
pointer_to_this <pointer_type 0x7ff60900> chain <type_decl
0x7fdd0380 void>>
QI
size <integer_cst 0x7fef0108 constant 8>
unit size <integer_cst 0x7fef0120 constant 1>
align 8 symtab 0 alias set -1 canonical type 0x7fe52ee0
arg-types <tree_list 0x7feff138 value <pointer_type 0x7ff609c0>
chain <tree_list 0x7fef0b10 value <void_type 0x7ff608a0 void>>>
pointer_to_this <pointer_type 0x7fe53000>>
addressable public external built-in QI file <built-in> line 0 col 0
align 8 built-in BUILT_IN_NORMAL:BUILT_IN_PREFETCH context <function_decl
0x7ff82b80 int_check> chain <var_decl 0x7fe2f900 _Utf15>>
and the DECL_CONTEXT turns out to be another function, one present in the
source of the testcase:
<function_decl 0x7ff82b80 int_check
type <function_type 0x7ff648c0
type <void_type 0x7ff608a0 void asm_written VOID
align 1 symtab 0 alias set -1 canonical type 0x7ff608a0
pointer_to_this <pointer_type 0x7ff60900> chain <type_decl
0x7fdd0380 void>>
QI
size <integer_cst 0x7fef0108 constant 8>
unit size <integer_cst 0x7fef0120 constant 1>
align 8 symtab 0 alias set -1 canonical type 0x7ff648c0
arg-types <tree_list 0x7fef0b10 value <void_type 0x7ff608a0 void>>
pointer_to_this <pointer_type 0x7fe27140>>
addressable public decl_2 QI file newarray_overflow.java line 20 col 0
align 8 context <record_type 0x7ff65520 newarray_overflow> initial <block
0x7fde6af8>
result <result_decl 0x7fe100a0 D.246 type <void_type 0x7ff608a0 void>
ignored VOID file newarray_overflow.java line 0 col 0
align 1 context <function_decl 0x7ff82b80 int_check>>
struct-function 0x7ff98df8 chain <function_decl 0x7ff82c00 object_check>>
... which is why the TYPE_NAME macro complains.
Is it expected for a builtin to appear as if it were a nested function like
this? If so, would it make sense to do something like replace this:
put_decl_node (TYPE_NAME (DECL_CONTEXT (node)),
verbosity);
with:
put_decl_node (TREE_CODE (DECL_CONTEXT (node)) == FUNCTION_DECL
? DECL_CONTEXT (node)
: TYPE_NAME (DECL_CONTEXT (node)),
verbosity);
so we just treat the builtin as another layer of scope?
cheers,
DaveK
next reply other threads:[~2010-12-10 20:25 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-12-10 20:25 Dave Korn [this message]
2010-12-11 9:59 ` Dave Korn
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=4D02925F.2030900@gmail.com \
--to=dave.korn.cygwin@gmail.com \
--cc=gcc@gcc.gnu.org \
--cc=java@gcc.gnu.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).