https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102953
--- Comment #11 from Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3 at citrix dot com> ---
(In reply to H.J. Lu from comment #10)
> (In reply to Andrew Cooper from comment #8)
> > Actually, there is a (possibly pre-existing) diagnostics issue:
> >
> > $ cat proto.c
> > static void __attribute__((cf_check)) foo(void);
> > static void __attribute__((unused)) foo(void)
> > {
> > }
> > void (*ptr)(void) = foo;
> >
> > $ gcc -Wall -Os -fcf-protection=branch -mmanual-endbr
> > -fcf-check-attribute=no -c proto.c -o proto.o
> > proto.c:2:37: error: conflicting types for 'foo'; have 'void(void)'
> > 2 | static void __attribute__((unused)) foo(void)
> > | ^~~
> > proto.c:1:39: note: previous declaration of 'foo' with type 'void(void)'
> > 1 | static void __attribute__((cf_check)) foo(void);
> > | ^~~
> >
> >
> > The diagnostic complaining that the forward declaration doesn't match the
> > definition gives 'void(void)' as the type in both cases, leaving out the
> > fact that they differ by cf_check-ness.
>
> Please try the v2 patch.
I appear to get no diagnostic at all now. This seems like a regression from
v1.
There should be a diagnostic, but it ought to include cf_check in the type it
prints.
