================
@@ -222,3 +222,49 @@ struct on_void_ty {
// expected-error@+1{{field has incomplete type 'void'}}
void wrong_ty __counted_by_or_null(count);
};
+
+//==============================================================================
+// __counted_by_or_null on pointer members in unions
+//==============================================================================
+
+// Pointer in anonymous union with count in parent struct - OK
+struct ptr_in_anon_union_count_in_parent {
+ int count;
+ union {
+ int a;
+ struct size_known *buf __counted_by_or_null(count);
+ };
+};
+
+// Pointer in named union - ERROR
+union ptr_in_named_union {
+ int count;
+ struct size_known *buf __counted_by_or_null(count); // expected-error
{{'counted_by_or_null' cannot be applied to a union member}}
+};
+
+// Both pointer and count in same anonymous union - ERROR (they share storage)
+struct ptr_and_count_in_same_anon_union {
+ union {
+ int count;
+ struct size_known *buf __counted_by_or_null(count); // expected-error
{{'counted_by_or_null' cannot be applied to a union member}}
+ };
+};
+
+// Count in anonymous union, pointer in parent struct - ERROR (count in union)
+struct count_in_anon_union_ptr_in_parent {
+ union {
+ int count;
+ int x;
+ };
+ struct size_known *buf __counted_by_or_null(count); // expected-error
{{'counted_by_or_null' argument cannot refer to a union member}}
+};
+
+// Count in anonymous union, but hidden by struct - ERROR (count in union)
+struct count_in_deep_anon_union {
+ union {
+ struct {
+ int count;
+ };
+ };
+ struct size_known *buf __counted_by_or_null(count); // expected-error
{{'counted_by_or_null' argument cannot refer to a union member}}
+};
----------------
ojhunt wrote:
Can we also add a test for
```c
struct count_in_deep_anon_union {
union {
struct {
int count;
struct size_known *buf1 __counted_by_or_null(count); // Should this be
valid or invalid?
};
};
struct size_known *buf2 __counted_by_or_null(count); // This should still be
invalid
};
```
From the code I _think_ that the behavior that will fall out of
`HasUnionInAncestors` is that the buf1 annotation will be considered invalid
but it would worth adding a test for this. Assuming it does get reported as
invalid I think that's fine as rejecting such obtuse code seems more than
reasonable.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/171996
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
