Ping: https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2020-July/549686.html
On 7/16/20 4:53 PM, Martin Sebor wrote:
Ping: https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2020-July/549686.html
(Jeff, I forgot to mention this patch when we spoke earlier today.)
On 7/8/20 6:01 PM, Martin Sebor wrote:
GCC has gotten better at detecting conflicts between various
attributes but it still doesn't do a perfect job of detecting
similar problems due to mismatches between contradictory
arguments to the same attribute. For example,
__attribute ((alloc_size (1))) void* allocate (size_t, size_t);
followed by
__attribute ((alloc_size (2))) void* allocate (size_t, size_t);
is accepted with the former overriding the latter in calls to
the function. Similar problem exists with a few other attributes
that take arguments.
The attached change adds a new utility function that checks for
such mismatches and issues warnings. It also adds calls to it
to detect the problem in attributes alloc_align, alloc_size, and
section. This isn't meant to be a comprehensive fix but rather
a starting point for one.
Tested on x86_64-linux.
Martin
PS I ran into this again while debugging some unrelated changes
and wondering about the behavior in similar situations to mine.
Since the behavior seemed clearly suboptimal I figured I might
as well fix it.
PPS The improved checking triggers warnings in a few calls to
__builtin_has_attribute due to apparent conflicts. I've xfailed
those in the test since it's a known issue with some existing
attributes that should be fixed at some point. Valid uses of
the built-in shouldn't trigger diagnostics except for completely
nonsensical arguments. Unfortunately, the line between valid
and completely nonsensical is a blurry one (GCC either issues
errors, or -Wattributes, or silently ignores some cases
altogether, such as those that are the subject of this patch)
and there is no internal mechanism to control the response.
