On Fri, 11 Jan 2019, Martin Sebor wrote:
> gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog:
>
> PR c/88718
> * gcc.dg/inline-40.c: New test.
> * gcc.dg/inline-41.c: New test.
We already have tests inline-40.c and inline-41.c; these need to be
renumbered accordingly.
> + if (add)
> + {
> + if (csi->function == func
> + || csi->function)
> + continue;
Since func is non-NULL, this is equivalent to "if (csi->function)".
Don't you want to break, not continue, in the case where csi->function (as
all the tentative entries come first)? As-is, this looks like it would
have quadratic cost if a file has many inline functions each referencing
some file-scope static. (The "Avoid adding another tentative record for
this DECL if one already exists." also looks quadratic, but having very
many functions in a file seems more likely than very many references to
statics in a single declaration that is not a definition.)
> @@ -5165,6 +5259,11 @@ finish_decl (tree decl, location_t init_loc, tree
> set_user_assembler_name (decl, asmspec);
> }
>
> + /* Remove any tentative record of a non-static inline function
> + referencing a static decl made a DECL that is not a definition. */
> + if (TREE_CODE (decl) == FUNCTION_DECL)
> + update_tentative_inline_static (decl);
> +
You also need to do the update when the declaration wasn't a function
declaration at all. The present patch produces spurious warnings for:
static int i;
int a[sizeof i];
inline void f (void) {}
because the reference to i in the declaration of a gets treated as if it
were in the definition of f.
Also, you need to distinguish the case of updating for a function
definition, and updating for a declaration that's not a definition, for a
function that was previously defined. E.g.
inline void f (int a[sizeof (int)]) {}
static int i;
inline void f (int a[sizeof i]);
must not diagnose a reference to i in f (you have such tests with the
declaration before the definition, but none that I can see with the
declaration after the definition). I think this means the caller of
update_tentative_inline_static should specify whether to add or remove,
rather than update_tentative_inline_static trying to deduce it from
properties of a DECL (that don't say whether the particular declaration in
question is a definition or not, just whether a definition has been seen).
--
Joseph S. Myers
jos...@codesourcery.com
