From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: by sourceware.org (Postfix, from userid 48) id ECEFA3857C6B; Thu, 25 Mar 2021 16:34:26 +0000 (GMT) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org ECEFA3857C6B From: "gprocida at google dot com" To: libabigail@sourceware.org Subject: [Bug default/27569] abidiff misses a function parameter addition Date: Thu, 25 Mar 2021 16:34:26 +0000 X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC X-Bugzilla-Type: changed X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None X-Bugzilla-Product: libabigail X-Bugzilla-Component: default X-Bugzilla-Version: unspecified X-Bugzilla-Keywords: X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal X-Bugzilla-Who: gprocida at google dot com X-Bugzilla-Status: ASSIGNED X-Bugzilla-Resolution: X-Bugzilla-Priority: P2 X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: dodji at redhat dot com X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: --- X-Bugzilla-Flags: X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Bugzilla-URL: http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/ Auto-Submitted: auto-generated MIME-Version: 1.0 X-BeenThere: libabigail@sourceware.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Mailing list of the Libabigail project List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 25 Mar 2021 16:34:27 -0000 https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D27569 --- Comment #8 from gprocida at google dot com --- Hi. On Thu, 25 Mar 2021 at 11:22, dodji at redhat dot com via Libabigail < libabigail@sourceware.org> wrote: > https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D27569 > > --- Comment #7 from dodji at redhat dot com --- > I have posted this tentative patch > https://sourceware.org/pipermail/libabigail/2021q1/003301.html. > > Could you please try it in your environment to see if it addresses the > issue > and review it? > > I had a quick look. It seems to do the trick. I don't think you need to include new test files as at least one existing test is affected by the change. A couple of questions: Can any other function level changes be missed? I'm guessing not, from looking at the XML attributes on a function-decl. In the bug, I wrote: I also think the only reason problems have not been noticed before is that is_filtered_out contains the suspicious-looking: if (category =3D=3D NO_CHANGE_CATEGORY) return false; If I remove this line and re-run tests, some other diffs disappear, such as: --- /usr/local/google/home/gprocida/android/libabigail/build/../tests/data/test= -diff-suppr/test10-changed-parm-c-report-0.txt 2021-02-03 10:29:34.846116830 +0000 +++ /usr/local/google/home/gprocida/android/libabigail/build/tests/output/test-= diff-suppr/test10-changed-parm-c-report-0.txt 2021-03-25 16:28:56.472979039 +0000 @@ -1,16 +1,3 @@ -Functions changes summary: 0 Removed, 1 Changed, 0 Added function +Functions changes summary: 0 Removed, 0 Changed (1 filtered out), 0 Added function Variables changes summary: 0 Removed, 0 Changed, 0 Added variable -1 function with some indirect sub-type change: - - [C] 'function int foo(int, int)' has some indirect sub-type changes: - return type changed: - type name changed from 'int' to 'float' - type size hasn't changed - parameter 1 of type 'int' changed: - type name changed from 'int' to 'float' - type size hasn't changed - parameter 2 of type 'int' changed: - type name changed from 'int' to 'float' - type size hasn't changed - Does this mean you are also missing a category for "has changed to a different type"? Or is that somehow the residual meaning of NO_CHANGE_CATEGORY? Thanks in advance. > > You're welcome. > -- > You are receiving this mail because: > You are on the CC list for the bug. --=20 You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.=