On Fri, Sep 18, 2015 at 5:06 PM, Richard Smith <rich...@metafoo.co.uk> wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 16, 2015 at 5:33 PM, Richard Smith <rich...@metafoo.co.uk> > wrote: > >> On Wed, Sep 16, 2015 at 5:27 PM, Nico Weber via cfe-commits < >> cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org> wrote: >> >>> On Tue, Sep 15, 2015 at 5:50 PM, Richard Smith <rich...@metafoo.co.uk> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> On Tue, Sep 15, 2015 at 12:38 PM, Nico Weber <tha...@chromium.org> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> With this patch, we warn on `bool a : 4;`, yet we don't warn on `bool >>>>> b` (which has 8 bits storage, 1 bit value). Warning on `bool b` is silly >>>>> of >>>>> course, but why is warning on `bool a : 4` useful? That's like 50% more >>>>> storage efficient than `bool b` ;-) >>>>> >>>>> It's possible that this is a good warning for some reason, but I don't >>>>> quite see why yet. >>>>> >>>> >>>> Why would we warn on "unsigned n : 57;"? The bit-field is wider than >>>> necessary, and we have no idea what the programmer was trying to do >>>> >>> >>> Warning on this kind of makes sense to me, as the field is wider than >>> the default width of int. (Not warning on that doesn't seem terrible to me >>> either though.) >>> >>> I'm only confused about the bool case with bitfield sizes < 8 I think. >>> We warn that the bitfield is wider than the value size, even though it's >>> smaller than the default storage size, and we don't warn on regular bools. >>> >>> To get an idea how often this warning fires, I ran it on a large-ish >>> open source codebase I had flying around. The only place it fired on is one >>> header in protobuf (extension_set.h). I looked at the history of that file, >>> and it had a struct that used to look like >>> >>> struct Extension { >>> SomeEnum e; >>> bool a; >>> bool b; >>> bool c; >>> int d; >>> // ...some more stuff... >>> }; >>> >>> Someone then added another field to this and for some reason decided to >>> do it like so: >>> >>> struct Extension { >>> SomeEnum e; >>> bool a; >>> bool b1 : 4; >>> bool b2 : 4; >>> bool c; >>> int d; >>> // ...some more stuff... >>> }; >>> >>> Neither the commit message nor the review discussion mention the >>> bitfield at all as far as I can tell. Now, given that this isn't a small >>> struct and it has a bunch of normal bools, I don't know why they added the >>> new field as bitfield while this wasn't deemed necessary for the existing >>> bools. My best guess is that that they didn't want to add 3 bytes of >>> padding (due to the int field), which seems like a decent reason. >>> >>> Had the warning been in place when this code got written, I suppose they >>> had used ": 1" instead. Does this make this code much better? It doesn't >>> seem like it to me. So after doing a warning quality eval, I'd suggest to >>> not emit the warning for bool bitfields if the bitfield size is < 8. (But >>> since the warning fires only very rarely, I don't feel very strongly about >>> this.) >>> >> >> I agree it doesn't make the code /much/ better. But if I were reading >> that, I would certainly pause for a few moments wondering what the author >> was thinking. I also don't feel especially strongly about this, but I don't >> see a good rationale for warning on 'bool : 9' but not on 'bool : 5'. >> > > I'm coming around to the opinion that we shouldn't give this warning on > bool at all -- the point of the warning is to point out that an 'unsigned : > 40;' bitfield can't hold 2**40 - 1, and values of that size will be > truncated. There is no corresponding problematic case for bool, so we have > a much weaker justification for warning in this case -- we have no idea > what the user was trying to achieve, but we do not have a signal that their > code is wrong. > > Thoughts? > Makes sense to me :-) What about `bool : 16`? > > , but it doesn't seem likely they got that effect. Would you be more >>>> convinced if we amended the diagnostic to provide a fixit suggesting using >>>> an anonymous bit-field to insert padding? >>>> >>> >>> Isn't the Right Fix (tm) to make bool bitfields 1 wide and rely on the >>> compiler to figure out padding? >>> >> >> It depends; maybe the intent is to be compatible with some on-disk >> format, and the explicit padding is important: >> >> struct X { >> int n : 3; >> bool b : 3; >> int n : 2; >> }; >> >> Changing the bool bit-field to 1 bit without inserting an anonymous >> bit-field would change the struct layout. >> >> >>> On Mon, Sep 14, 2015 at 11:06 PM, Richard Smith <rich...@metafoo.co.uk> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> On Mon, Sep 14, 2015 at 7:07 PM, Rachel Craik <rcr...@ca.ibm.com> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> As of DR262, the C standard clarified that the width of a bit-field >>>>>>> can not exceed that of the specified type, and this change was >>>>>>> primarily to >>>>>>> ensure that Clang correctly enforced this part of the standard. Looking >>>>>>> at >>>>>>> the C++11 standard again, it states that although the specified width >>>>>>> of a >>>>>>> bit-field may exceed the number of bits in the *object >>>>>>> representation* (which includes padding bits) of the specified >>>>>>> type, the extra bits will not take any part in the bit-field's *value >>>>>>> representation*. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Taking this into account, it seems that the correct way to validate >>>>>>> the width of a bit-field (ignoring the special case of MS in C mode) >>>>>>> would >>>>>>> be to use getIntWidth in C mode, and getTypeSize in C++ mode. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I would be happy create a patch to make this change tomorrow if >>>>>>> people are in agreement. >>>>>>> >>>>>> David Majnemer has already landed a couple of changes to fix this up, >>>>>> so hopefully that won't be necessary. Thanks for working on this! >>>>>> >>>>>>> Rachel >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> [image: Inactive hide details for Nico Weber ---09/14/2015 09:53:25 >>>>>>> PM---On Mon, Sep 14, 2015 at 5:28 PM, Richard Smith <richard@metafo]Nico >>>>>>> Weber ---09/14/2015 09:53:25 PM---On Mon, Sep 14, 2015 at 5:28 PM, >>>>>>> Richard >>>>>>> Smith <rich...@metafoo.co.uk> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> From: Nico Weber <tha...@chromium.org> >>>>>>> To: Richard Smith <rich...@metafoo.co.uk> >>>>>>> Cc: Rachel Craik/Toronto/IBM@IBMCA, cfe-commits < >>>>>>> cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org> >>>>>>> Date: 09/14/2015 09:53 PM >>>>>>> Subject: Re: r247618 - C11 _Bool bitfield diagnostic >>>>>>> Sent by: tha...@google.com >>>>>>> ------------------------------ >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Mon, Sep 14, 2015 at 5:28 PM, Richard Smith < >>>>>>> *rich...@metafoo.co.uk* <rich...@metafoo.co.uk>> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Mon, Sep 14, 2015 at 5:18 PM, Nico Weber via cfe-commits < >>>>>>> *cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org* <cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org>> wrote: >>>>>>> This also fires for bool in C++ files, even though the commit >>>>>>> message saying C11 and _Bool. Given the test changes, I suppose >>>>>>> that's >>>>>>> intentional? This fires a lot on existing code, for example >>>>>>> protobuf: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> ../../third_party/protobuf/src/google/protobuf/extension_set.h:465:10: >>>>>>> error: width of bit-field 'is_cleared' (4 bits) exceeds the width >>>>>>> of its >>>>>>> type; value will be truncated to 1 bit [-Werror,-Wbitfield-width] >>>>>>> bool is_cleared : 4; >>>>>>> ^ >>>>>>> >>>>>>> ../../third_party/protobuf/src/google/protobuf/extension_set.h:472:10: >>>>>>> error: width of bit-field 'is_lazy' (4 bits) exceeds the width of >>>>>>> its type; >>>>>>> value will be truncated to 1 bit [-Werror,-Wbitfield-width] >>>>>>> bool is_lazy : 4; >>>>>>> ^ >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Is this expected? Is this a behavior change, or did the >>>>>>> truncation happen previously and it's now just getting warned on? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> The code previously assumed that MSVC used the C rules here; it >>>>>>> appears that's not true in all cases. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> This was on a Mac bot… >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Can we just remove the " || IsMsStruct >>>>>>> || Context.getTargetInfo().getCXXABI().isMicrosoft()"? Is there some >>>>>>> reason >>>>>>> we need to prohibit overwide bitfields for MS bitfield layout, >>>>>>> rather than >>>>>>> just warning on them? (Does record layout fail somehow?) >>>>>>> On Mon, Sep 14, 2015 at 2:27 PM, Rachel Craik via cfe-commits < >>>>>>> *cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org* <cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org>> >>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>> Author: rcraik >>>>>>> Date: Mon Sep 14 16:27:36 2015 >>>>>>> New Revision: 247618 >>>>>>> >>>>>>> URL: >>>>>>> *http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=247618&view=rev* >>>>>>> <http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=247618&view=rev> >>>>>>> Log: >>>>>>> C11 _Bool bitfield diagnostic >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Summary: Implement DR262 (for C). This patch will mainly >>>>>>> affect bitfields of type _Bool >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Reviewers: fraggamuffin, rsmith >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Subscribers: hubert.reinterpretcast, cfe-commits >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Differential Revision: *http://reviews.llvm.org/D10018* >>>>>>> <http://reviews.llvm.org/D10018> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Modified: >>>>>>> cfe/trunk/include/clang/Basic/DiagnosticGroups.td >>>>>>> cfe/trunk/include/clang/Basic/DiagnosticSemaKinds.td >>>>>>> cfe/trunk/lib/Sema/SemaDecl.cpp >>>>>>> cfe/trunk/test/CodeGen/bitfield-2.c >>>>>>> cfe/trunk/test/CodeGenCXX/warn-padded-packed.cpp >>>>>>> cfe/trunk/test/Misc/warning-flags.c >>>>>>> cfe/trunk/test/Sema/bitfield.c >>>>>>> cfe/trunk/test/SemaCXX/bitfield-layout.cpp >>>>>>> cfe/trunk/test/SemaCXX/constant-expression-cxx11.cpp >>>>>>> cfe/trunk/test/SemaCXX/constant-expression-cxx1y.cpp >>>>>>> cfe/trunk/test/SemaCXX/ms_wide_bitfield.cpp >>>>>>> cfe/trunk/test/SemaObjC/class-bitfield.m >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Modified: cfe/trunk/include/clang/Basic/DiagnosticGroups.td >>>>>>> URL: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> *http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project/cfe/trunk/include/clang/Basic/DiagnosticGroups.td?rev=247618&r1=247617&r2=247618&view=diff* >>>>>>> >>>>>>> <http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project/cfe/trunk/include/clang/Basic/DiagnosticGroups.td?rev=247618&r1=247617&r2=247618&view=diff> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> ============================================================================== >>>>>>> --- cfe/trunk/include/clang/Basic/DiagnosticGroups.td >>>>>>> (original) >>>>>>> +++ cfe/trunk/include/clang/Basic/DiagnosticGroups.td Mon >>>>>>> Sep 14 16:27:36 2015 >>>>>>> @@ -32,6 +32,7 @@ def AutoImport : DiagGroup<"auto-import" >>>>>>> def GNUBinaryLiteral : DiagGroup<"gnu-binary-literal">; >>>>>>> def GNUCompoundLiteralInitializer : >>>>>>> DiagGroup<"gnu-compound-literal-initializer">; >>>>>>> def BitFieldConstantConversion : >>>>>>> DiagGroup<"bitfield-constant-conversion">; >>>>>>> +def BitFieldWidth : DiagGroup<"bitfield-width">; >>>>>>> def ConstantConversion : >>>>>>> DiagGroup<"constant-conversion", [ >>>>>>> BitFieldConstantConversion ] >; >>>>>>> def LiteralConversion : DiagGroup<"literal-conversion">; >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Modified: >>>>>>> cfe/trunk/include/clang/Basic/DiagnosticSemaKinds.td >>>>>>> URL: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> *http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project/cfe/trunk/include/clang/Basic/DiagnosticSemaKinds.td?rev=247618&r1=247617&r2=247618&view=diff* >>>>>>> >>>>>>> <http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project/cfe/trunk/include/clang/Basic/DiagnosticSemaKinds.td?rev=247618&r1=247617&r2=247618&view=diff> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> ============================================================================== >>>>>>> --- cfe/trunk/include/clang/Basic/DiagnosticSemaKinds.td >>>>>>> (original) >>>>>>> +++ cfe/trunk/include/clang/Basic/DiagnosticSemaKinds.td >>>>>>> Mon Sep 14 16:27:36 2015 >>>>>>> @@ -4314,20 +4314,21 @@ def >>>>>>> err_bitfield_has_negative_width : Er >>>>>>> def err_anon_bitfield_has_negative_width : Error< >>>>>>> "anonymous bit-field has negative width (%0)">; >>>>>>> def err_bitfield_has_zero_width : Error<"named bit-field >>>>>>> %0 has zero width">; >>>>>>> -def err_bitfield_width_exceeds_type_size : Error< >>>>>>> - "size of bit-field %0 (%1 bits) exceeds size of its >>>>>>> type (%2 bits)">; >>>>>>> -def err_anon_bitfield_width_exceeds_type_size : Error< >>>>>>> - "size of anonymous bit-field (%0 bits) exceeds size of >>>>>>> its type (%1 bits)">; >>>>>>> +def err_bitfield_width_exceeds_type_width : Error< >>>>>>> + "width of bit-field %0 (%1 bits) exceeds width of its >>>>>>> type (%2 bit%s2)">; >>>>>>> +def err_anon_bitfield_width_exceeds_type_width : Error< >>>>>>> + "width of anonymous bit-field (%0 bits) exceeds width >>>>>>> of its type " >>>>>>> + "(%1 bit%s1)">; >>>>>>> def err_incorrect_number_of_vector_initializers : Error< >>>>>>> "number of elements must be either one or match the >>>>>>> size of the vector">; >>>>>>> >>>>>>> // Used by C++ which allows bit-fields that are wider >>>>>>> than the type. >>>>>>> -def warn_bitfield_width_exceeds_type_size: Warning< >>>>>>> - "size of bit-field %0 (%1 bits) exceeds the size of its >>>>>>> type; value will be " >>>>>>> - "truncated to %2 bits">; >>>>>>> -def warn_anon_bitfield_width_exceeds_type_size : Warning< >>>>>>> - "size of anonymous bit-field (%0 bits) exceeds size of >>>>>>> its type; value will " >>>>>>> - "be truncated to %1 bits">; >>>>>>> +def warn_bitfield_width_exceeds_type_width: Warning< >>>>>>> + "width of bit-field %0 (%1 bits) exceeds the width of >>>>>>> its type; value will " >>>>>>> + "be truncated to %2 bit%s2">, InGroup<BitFieldWidth>; >>>>>>> +def warn_anon_bitfield_width_exceeds_type_width : Warning< >>>>>>> + "width of anonymous bit-field (%0 bits) exceeds width >>>>>>> of its type; value " >>>>>>> + "will be truncated to %1 bit%s1">, >>>>>>> InGroup<BitFieldWidth>; >>>>>>> >>>>>>> def warn_missing_braces : Warning< >>>>>>> "suggest braces around initialization of subobject">, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Modified: cfe/trunk/lib/Sema/SemaDecl.cpp >>>>>>> URL: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> *http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project/cfe/trunk/lib/Sema/SemaDecl.cpp?rev=247618&r1=247617&r2=247618&view=diff* >>>>>>> >>>>>>> <http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project/cfe/trunk/lib/Sema/SemaDecl.cpp?rev=247618&r1=247617&r2=247618&view=diff> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> ============================================================================== >>>>>>> --- cfe/trunk/lib/Sema/SemaDecl.cpp (original) >>>>>>> +++ cfe/trunk/lib/Sema/SemaDecl.cpp Mon Sep 14 16:27:36 >>>>>>> 2015 >>>>>>> @@ -12625,26 +12625,26 @@ ExprResult >>>>>>> Sema::VerifyBitField(SourceLo >>>>>>> } >>>>>>> >>>>>>> if (!FieldTy->isDependentType()) { >>>>>>> - uint64_t TypeSize = Context.getTypeSize(FieldTy); >>>>>>> - if (Value.getZExtValue() > TypeSize) { >>>>>>> + uint64_t TypeWidth = Context.getIntWidth(FieldTy); >>>>>>> + if (Value.ugt(TypeWidth)) { >>>>>>> if (!getLangOpts().CPlusPlus || IsMsStruct || >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Context.getTargetInfo().getCXXABI().isMicrosoft()) { >>>>>>> if (FieldName) >>>>>>> - return Diag(FieldLoc, >>>>>>> diag::err_bitfield_width_exceeds_type_size) >>>>>>> + return Diag(FieldLoc, >>>>>>> diag::err_bitfield_width_exceeds_type_width) >>>>>>> << FieldName << (unsigned)Value.getZExtValue() >>>>>>> - << (unsigned)TypeSize; >>>>>>> + << (unsigned)TypeWidth; >>>>>>> >>>>>>> - return Diag(FieldLoc, >>>>>>> diag::err_anon_bitfield_width_exceeds_type_size) >>>>>>> - << (unsigned)Value.getZExtValue() << >>>>>>> (unsigned)TypeSize; >>>>>>> + return Diag(FieldLoc, >>>>>>> diag::err_anon_bitfield_width_exceeds_type_width) >>>>>>> + << (unsigned)Value.getZExtValue() << >>>>>>> (unsigned)TypeWidth; >>>>>>> } >>>>>>> >>>>>>> if (FieldName) >>>>>>> - Diag(FieldLoc, >>>>>>> diag::warn_bitfield_width_exceeds_type_size) >>>>>>> + Diag(FieldLoc, >>>>>>> diag::warn_bitfield_width_exceeds_type_width) >>>>>>> << FieldName << (unsigned)Value.getZExtValue() >>>>>>> - << (unsigned)TypeSize; >>>>>>> + << (unsigned)TypeWidth; >>>>>>> else >>>>>>> - Diag(FieldLoc, >>>>>>> diag::warn_anon_bitfield_width_exceeds_type_size) >>>>>>> - << (unsigned)Value.getZExtValue() << >>>>>>> (unsigned)TypeSize; >>>>>>> + Diag(FieldLoc, >>>>>>> diag::warn_anon_bitfield_width_exceeds_type_width) >>>>>>> + << (unsigned)Value.getZExtValue() << >>>>>>> (unsigned)TypeWidth; >>>>>>> } >>>>>>> } >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Modified: cfe/trunk/test/CodeGen/bitfield-2.c >>>>>>> URL: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> *http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project/cfe/trunk/test/CodeGen/bitfield-2.c?rev=247618&r1=247617&r2=247618&view=diff* >>>>>>> >>>>>>> <http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project/cfe/trunk/test/CodeGen/bitfield-2.c?rev=247618&r1=247617&r2=247618&view=diff> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> ============================================================================== >>>>>>> --- cfe/trunk/test/CodeGen/bitfield-2.c (original) >>>>>>> +++ cfe/trunk/test/CodeGen/bitfield-2.c Mon Sep 14 >>>>>>> 16:27:36 2015 >>>>>>> @@ -237,7 +237,7 @@ unsigned long long test_5() { >>>>>>> /***/ >>>>>>> >>>>>>> struct s6 { >>>>>>> - _Bool f0 : 2; >>>>>>> + unsigned f0 : 2; >>>>>>> }; >>>>>>> >>>>>>> struct s6 g6 = { 0xF }; >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Modified: cfe/trunk/test/CodeGenCXX/warn-padded-packed.cpp >>>>>>> URL: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> *http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project/cfe/trunk/test/CodeGenCXX/warn-padded-packed.cpp?rev=247618&r1=247617&r2=247618&view=diff* >>>>>>> >>>>>>> <http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project/cfe/trunk/test/CodeGenCXX/warn-padded-packed.cpp?rev=247618&r1=247617&r2=247618&view=diff> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> ============================================================================== >>>>>>> --- cfe/trunk/test/CodeGenCXX/warn-padded-packed.cpp >>>>>>> (original) >>>>>>> +++ cfe/trunk/test/CodeGenCXX/warn-padded-packed.cpp Mon >>>>>>> Sep 14 16:27:36 2015 >>>>>>> @@ -69,7 +69,7 @@ struct S12 { >>>>>>> >>>>>>> struct S13 { // expected-warning {{padding size of 'S13' >>>>>>> with 6 bits to alignment boundary}} >>>>>>> char c; >>>>>>> - bool b : 10; // expected-warning {{size of bit-field >>>>>>> 'b' (10 bits) exceeds the size of its type}} >>>>>>> + bool b : 10; // expected-warning {{width of bit-field >>>>>>> 'b' (10 bits) exceeds the width of its type}} >>>>>>> }; >>>>>>> >>>>>>> // The warnings are emitted when the layout of the >>>>>>> structs is computed, so we have to use them. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Modified: cfe/trunk/test/Misc/warning-flags.c >>>>>>> URL: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> *http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project/cfe/trunk/test/Misc/warning-flags.c?rev=247618&r1=247617&r2=247618&view=diff* >>>>>>> >>>>>>> <http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project/cfe/trunk/test/Misc/warning-flags.c?rev=247618&r1=247617&r2=247618&view=diff> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> ============================================================================== >>>>>>> --- cfe/trunk/test/Misc/warning-flags.c (original) >>>>>>> +++ cfe/trunk/test/Misc/warning-flags.c Mon Sep 14 >>>>>>> 16:27:36 2015 >>>>>>> @@ -18,7 +18,7 @@ This test serves two purposes: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> The list of warnings below should NEVER grow. It should >>>>>>> gradually shrink to 0. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> -CHECK: Warnings without flags (92): >>>>>>> +CHECK: Warnings without flags (90): >>>>>>> CHECK-NEXT: ext_excess_initializers >>>>>>> CHECK-NEXT: >>>>>>> ext_excess_initializers_in_char_array_initializer >>>>>>> CHECK-NEXT: ext_expected_semi_decl_list >>>>>>> @@ -44,10 +44,8 @@ CHECK-NEXT: pp_pragma_once_in_main_fil >>>>>>> CHECK-NEXT: pp_pragma_sysheader_in_main_file >>>>>>> CHECK-NEXT: w_asm_qualifier_ignored >>>>>>> CHECK-NEXT: warn_accessor_property_type_mismatch >>>>>>> -CHECK-NEXT: warn_anon_bitfield_width_exceeds_type_size >>>>>>> CHECK-NEXT: warn_arcmt_nsalloc_realloc >>>>>>> CHECK-NEXT: warn_asm_label_on_auto_decl >>>>>>> -CHECK-NEXT: warn_bitfield_width_exceeds_type_size >>>>>>> CHECK-NEXT: warn_c_kext >>>>>>> CHECK-NEXT: >>>>>>> warn_call_to_pure_virtual_member_function_from_ctor_dtor >>>>>>> CHECK-NEXT: warn_call_wrong_number_of_arguments >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Modified: cfe/trunk/test/Sema/bitfield.c >>>>>>> URL: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> *http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project/cfe/trunk/test/Sema/bitfield.c?rev=247618&r1=247617&r2=247618&view=diff* >>>>>>> >>>>>>> <http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project/cfe/trunk/test/Sema/bitfield.c?rev=247618&r1=247617&r2=247618&view=diff> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> ============================================================================== >>>>>>> --- cfe/trunk/test/Sema/bitfield.c (original) >>>>>>> +++ cfe/trunk/test/Sema/bitfield.c Mon Sep 14 16:27:36 2015 >>>>>>> @@ -6,7 +6,7 @@ struct a { >>>>>>> int a : -1; // expected-error{{bit-field 'a' has >>>>>>> negative width}} >>>>>>> >>>>>>> // rdar://6081627 >>>>>>> - int b : 33; // expected-error{{size of bit-field 'b' >>>>>>> (33 bits) exceeds size of its type (32 bits)}} >>>>>>> + int b : 33; // expected-error{{width of bit-field 'b' >>>>>>> (33 bits) exceeds width of its type (32 bits)}} >>>>>>> >>>>>>> int c : (1 + 0.25); // expected-error{{expression is >>>>>>> not an integer constant expression}} >>>>>>> int d : (int)(1 + 0.25); >>>>>>> @@ -22,9 +22,12 @@ struct a { >>>>>>> int g : (_Bool)1; >>>>>>> >>>>>>> // PR4017 >>>>>>> - char : 10; // expected-error {{size of anonymous >>>>>>> bit-field (10 bits) exceeds size of its type (8 bits)}} >>>>>>> + char : 10; // expected-error {{width of anonymous >>>>>>> bit-field (10 bits) exceeds width of its type (8 bits)}} >>>>>>> unsigned : -2; // expected-error {{anonymous bit-field >>>>>>> has negative width (-2)}} >>>>>>> float : 12; // expected-error {{anonymous bit-field >>>>>>> has non-integral type 'float'}} >>>>>>> + >>>>>>> + _Bool : 2; // expected-error {{width of anonymous >>>>>>> bit-field (2 bits) exceeds width of its type (1 bit)}} >>>>>>> + _Bool h : 5; // expected-error {{width of bit-field 'h' >>>>>>> (5 bits) exceeds width of its type (1 bit)}} >>>>>>> }; >>>>>>> >>>>>>> struct b {unsigned x : 2;} x; >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Modified: cfe/trunk/test/SemaCXX/bitfield-layout.cpp >>>>>>> URL: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> *http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project/cfe/trunk/test/SemaCXX/bitfield-layout.cpp?rev=247618&r1=247617&r2=247618&view=diff* >>>>>>> >>>>>>> <http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project/cfe/trunk/test/SemaCXX/bitfield-layout.cpp?rev=247618&r1=247617&r2=247618&view=diff> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> ============================================================================== >>>>>>> --- cfe/trunk/test/SemaCXX/bitfield-layout.cpp (original) >>>>>>> +++ cfe/trunk/test/SemaCXX/bitfield-layout.cpp Mon Sep 14 >>>>>>> 16:27:36 2015 >>>>>>> @@ -5,25 +5,25 @@ >>>>>>> >>>>>>> // Simple tests. >>>>>>> struct Test1 { >>>>>>> - char c : 9; // expected-warning {{size of bit-field 'c' >>>>>>> (9 bits) exceeds the size of its type; value will be truncated >>>>>>> to 8 bits}} >>>>>>> + char c : 9; // expected-warning {{width of bit-field >>>>>>> 'c' (9 bits) exceeds the width of its type; value will be >>>>>>> truncated to 8 >>>>>>> bits}} >>>>>>> }; >>>>>>> CHECK_SIZE(Test1, 2); >>>>>>> CHECK_ALIGN(Test1, 1); >>>>>>> >>>>>>> struct Test2 { >>>>>>> - char c : 16; // expected-warning {{size of bit-field >>>>>>> 'c' (16 bits) exceeds the size of its type; value will be >>>>>>> truncated to 8 >>>>>>> bits}} >>>>>>> + char c : 16; // expected-warning {{width of bit-field >>>>>>> 'c' (16 bits) exceeds the width of its type; value will be >>>>>>> truncated to 8 >>>>>>> bits}} >>>>>>> }; >>>>>>> CHECK_SIZE(Test2, 2); >>>>>>> CHECK_ALIGN(Test2, 2); >>>>>>> >>>>>>> struct Test3 { >>>>>>> - char c : 32; // expected-warning {{size of bit-field >>>>>>> 'c' (32 bits) exceeds the size of its type; value will be >>>>>>> truncated to 8 >>>>>>> bits}} >>>>>>> + char c : 32; // expected-warning {{width of bit-field >>>>>>> 'c' (32 bits) exceeds the width of its type; value will be >>>>>>> truncated to 8 >>>>>>> bits}} >>>>>>> }; >>>>>>> CHECK_SIZE(Test3, 4); >>>>>>> CHECK_ALIGN(Test3, 4); >>>>>>> >>>>>>> struct Test4 { >>>>>>> - char c : 64; // expected-warning {{size of bit-field >>>>>>> 'c' (64 bits) exceeds the size of its type; value will be >>>>>>> truncated to 8 >>>>>>> bits}} >>>>>>> + char c : 64; // expected-warning {{width of bit-field >>>>>>> 'c' (64 bits) exceeds the width of its type; value will be >>>>>>> truncated to 8 >>>>>>> bits}} >>>>>>> }; >>>>>>> CHECK_SIZE(Test4, 8); >>>>>>> CHECK_ALIGN(Test4, 8); >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Modified: >>>>>>> cfe/trunk/test/SemaCXX/constant-expression-cxx11.cpp >>>>>>> URL: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> *http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project/cfe/trunk/test/SemaCXX/constant-expression-cxx11.cpp?rev=247618&r1=247617&r2=247618&view=diff* >>>>>>> >>>>>>> <http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project/cfe/trunk/test/SemaCXX/constant-expression-cxx11.cpp?rev=247618&r1=247617&r2=247618&view=diff> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> ============================================================================== >>>>>>> --- cfe/trunk/test/SemaCXX/constant-expression-cxx11.cpp >>>>>>> (original) >>>>>>> +++ cfe/trunk/test/SemaCXX/constant-expression-cxx11.cpp >>>>>>> Mon Sep 14 16:27:36 2015 >>>>>>> @@ -1801,9 +1801,9 @@ namespace Bitfields { >>>>>>> bool b : 1; >>>>>>> unsigned u : 5; >>>>>>> int n : 5; >>>>>>> - bool b2 : 3; >>>>>>> - unsigned u2 : 74; // expected-warning {{exceeds the >>>>>>> size of its type}} >>>>>>> - int n2 : 81; // expected-warning {{exceeds the size >>>>>>> of its type}} >>>>>>> + bool b2 : 3; // expected-warning {{exceeds the width >>>>>>> of its type}} >>>>>>> + unsigned u2 : 74; // expected-warning {{exceeds the >>>>>>> width of its type}} >>>>>>> + int n2 : 81; // expected-warning {{exceeds the width >>>>>>> of its type}} >>>>>>> }; >>>>>>> >>>>>>> constexpr A a = { false, 33, 31, false, 0xffffffff, >>>>>>> 0x7fffffff }; // expected-warning 2{{truncation}} >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Modified: >>>>>>> cfe/trunk/test/SemaCXX/constant-expression-cxx1y.cpp >>>>>>> URL: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> *http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project/cfe/trunk/test/SemaCXX/constant-expression-cxx1y.cpp?rev=247618&r1=247617&r2=247618&view=diff* >>>>>>> >>>>>>> <http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project/cfe/trunk/test/SemaCXX/constant-expression-cxx1y.cpp?rev=247618&r1=247617&r2=247618&view=diff> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> ============================================================================== >>>>>>> --- cfe/trunk/test/SemaCXX/constant-expression-cxx1y.cpp >>>>>>> (original) >>>>>>> +++ cfe/trunk/test/SemaCXX/constant-expression-cxx1y.cpp >>>>>>> Mon Sep 14 16:27:36 2015 >>>>>>> @@ -872,7 +872,7 @@ namespace Lifetime { >>>>>>> >>>>>>> namespace Bitfields { >>>>>>> struct A { >>>>>>> - bool b : 3; >>>>>>> + bool b : 1; >>>>>>> int n : 4; >>>>>>> unsigned u : 5; >>>>>>> }; >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Modified: cfe/trunk/test/SemaCXX/ms_wide_bitfield.cpp >>>>>>> URL: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> *http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project/cfe/trunk/test/SemaCXX/ms_wide_bitfield.cpp?rev=247618&r1=247617&r2=247618&view=diff* >>>>>>> >>>>>>> <http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project/cfe/trunk/test/SemaCXX/ms_wide_bitfield.cpp?rev=247618&r1=247617&r2=247618&view=diff> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> ============================================================================== >>>>>>> --- cfe/trunk/test/SemaCXX/ms_wide_bitfield.cpp (original) >>>>>>> +++ cfe/trunk/test/SemaCXX/ms_wide_bitfield.cpp Mon Sep 14 >>>>>>> 16:27:36 2015 >>>>>>> @@ -1,9 +1,10 @@ >>>>>>> // RUN: %clang_cc1 -fno-rtti -emit-llvm-only -triple >>>>>>> i686-pc-win32 -fdump-record-layouts -fsyntax-only >>>>>>> -mms-bitfields -verify %s >>>>>>> 2>&1 >>>>>>> >>>>>>> struct A { >>>>>>> - char a : 9; // expected-error{{size of bit-field 'a' (9 >>>>>>> bits) exceeds size of its type (8 bits)}} >>>>>>> - int b : 33; // expected-error{{size of bit-field 'b' >>>>>>> (33 bits) exceeds size of its type (32 bits)}} >>>>>>> - bool c : 9; // expected-error{{size of bit-field 'c' (9 >>>>>>> bits) exceeds size of its type (8 bits)}} >>>>>>> + char a : 9; // expected-error{{width of bit-field 'a' >>>>>>> (9 bits) exceeds width of its type (8 bits)}} >>>>>>> + int b : 33; // expected-error{{width of bit-field 'b' >>>>>>> (33 bits) exceeds width of its type (32 bits)}} >>>>>>> + bool c : 9; // expected-error{{width of bit-field 'c' >>>>>>> (9 bits) exceeds width of its type (1 bit)}} >>>>>>> + bool d : 3; // expected-error{{width of bit-field 'd' >>>>>>> (3 bits) exceeds width of its type (1 bit)}} >>>>>>> }; >>>>>>> >>>>>>> int a[sizeof(A) == 1 ? 1 : -1]; >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Modified: cfe/trunk/test/SemaObjC/class-bitfield.m >>>>>>> URL: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> *http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project/cfe/trunk/test/SemaObjC/class-bitfield.m?rev=247618&r1=247617&r2=247618&view=diff* >>>>>>> >>>>>>> <http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project/cfe/trunk/test/SemaObjC/class-bitfield.m?rev=247618&r1=247617&r2=247618&view=diff> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> ============================================================================== >>>>>>> --- cfe/trunk/test/SemaObjC/class-bitfield.m (original) >>>>>>> +++ cfe/trunk/test/SemaObjC/class-bitfield.m Mon Sep 14 >>>>>>> 16:27:36 2015 >>>>>>> @@ -5,7 +5,7 @@ >>>>>>> int a : -1; // expected-error{{bit-field 'a' has >>>>>>> negative width}} >>>>>>> >>>>>>> // rdar://6081627 >>>>>>> - int b : 33; // expected-error{{size of bit-field 'b' >>>>>>> (33 bits) exceeds size of its type (32 bits)}} >>>>>>> + int b : 33; // expected-error{{width of bit-field 'b' >>>>>>> (33 bits) exceeds width of its type (32 bits)}} >>>>>>> >>>>>>> int c : (1 + 0.25); // expected-error{{expression is >>>>>>> not an integer constant expression}} >>>>>>> int d : (int)(1 + 0.25); >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>> cfe-commits mailing list >>>>>>> *cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org* <cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org> >>>>>>> *http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits* >>>>>>> <http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>> cfe-commits mailing list >>>>>>> *cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org* <cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org> >>>>>>> *http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits* >>>>>>> <http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> cfe-commits mailing list >>> cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org >>> http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits >>> >>> >> >
_______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits