On Wed, Dec 07, 2016 at 08:24:33PM -0700, Martin Sebor wrote:
> @@ -8622,15 +8635,17 @@ rewrite_call_expr (location_t loc, tree exp, int
> skip, tree fndecl, int n, ...)
> }
>
> /* Validate a single argument ARG against a tree code CODE representing
> - a type. */
> + a type. When NONNULL is true consider a pointer argument valid only
> + if it's non-null. Return true when argument is valid. */
>
> static bool
> -validate_arg (const_tree arg, enum tree_code code)
> +validate_arg (const_tree arg, enum tree_code code, bool nonnull /*= false*/)
> {
> if (!arg)
> return false;
> else if (code == POINTER_TYPE)
> - return POINTER_TYPE_P (TREE_TYPE (arg));
> + return POINTER_TYPE_P (TREE_TYPE (arg))
> + && (!nonnull || !integer_zerop (arg));
> else if (code == INTEGER_TYPE)
> return INTEGRAL_TYPE_P (TREE_TYPE (arg));
> return code == TREE_CODE (TREE_TYPE (arg));
This is badly formatted, it would need to be
return (POINTER_TYPE_P (TREE_TYPE (arg))
&& (!nonnull || !integer_zerop (arg)));
but more importantly, we have 45 validate_arg calls that really don't care
about the nonnull stuff and a single one that cares. I think
it would be better to revert the validate_arg changes and do:
case POINTER_TYPE:
/* The actual argument must be nonnull when either the whole
called function has been declared nonnull, or when the formal
argument corresponding to the actual argument has been. */
if (argmap)
nonnull = bitmap_empty_p (argmap) || bitmap_bit_p (argmap, argno);
arg = next_const_call_expr_arg (&iter);
if (!validate_arg (arg, code) || (nonnull && !integer_zerop (arg)))
goto end;
break;
default:
/* If no parameters remain or the parameter's code does not
match the specified code, return false. Otherwise continue
checking any remaining arguments. */
arg = next_const_call_expr_arg (&iter);
if (!validate_arg (arg, code, nonnull))
goto end;
break;
Jakub
