On 01/17/2017 11:43 AM, Jan Hubicka wrote:
>>
>> gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog:
>>
>> 2017-01-12 Martin Liska <mli...@suse.cz>
>>
>> PR ipa/71207
>> * g++.dg/ipa/pr71207.C: New test.
>>
>> gcc/ChangeLog:
>>
>> 2017-01-12 Martin Liska <mli...@suse.cz>
>>
>> PR ipa/71207
>> * ipa-polymorphic-call.c (contains_type_p): Fix wrong
>> assumption, add comment and renamed otr_type to inner_type.
>> ---
>> gcc/ipa-polymorphic-call.c | 22 ++++++++++----------
>> gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/ipa/pr71207.C | 42
>> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>> 2 files changed, 53 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)
>> create mode 100644 gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/ipa/pr71207.C
>>
>> diff --git a/gcc/ipa-polymorphic-call.c b/gcc/ipa-polymorphic-call.c
>> index da64ce4c6e0..c13fc858c86 100644
>> --- a/gcc/ipa-polymorphic-call.c
>> +++ b/gcc/ipa-polymorphic-call.c
>> @@ -446,15 +446,15 @@ no_useful_type_info:
>> }
>> }
>>
>> -/* Return true if OUTER_TYPE contains OTR_TYPE at OFFSET.
>> - CONSIDER_PLACEMENT_NEW makes function to accept cases where OTR_TYPE can
>> +/* Return true if OUTER_TYPE contains INNER_TYPE at OFFSET.
>> + CONSIDER_PLACEMENT_NEW makes function to accept cases where INNER_TYPE
>> can
>> be built within OUTER_TYPE by means of placement new. CONSIDER_BASES
>> makes
>> - function to accept cases where OTR_TYPE appears as base of OUTER_TYPE or
>> as
>> + function to accept cases where INNER_TYPE appears as base of OUTER_TYPE
>> or as
>> base of one of fields of OUTER_TYPE. */
>>
>> static bool
>> contains_type_p (tree outer_type, HOST_WIDE_INT offset,
>> - tree otr_type,
>> + tree inner_type,
>
> I would actually keep otr_type (or change it consistently in all cases).
> otr comes from OBJ_TYPE_REF and is used thorough the code (not my invention,
> comming from original binfo walking routine).
>
> OK with that change. I bleive I added the size check only to cut the
> recurision
> early which is not a big deal.
Ok, applied without the renaming as r244530. I guess you added that to cut the
recursion.
Would it be fine to install the patch to active branches after proper testing?
Thanks,
Martin
>> bool consider_placement_new,
>> bool consider_bases)
>> {
>> @@ -463,18 +463,18 @@ contains_type_p (tree outer_type, HOST_WIDE_INT offset,
>> /* Check that type is within range. */
>> if (offset < 0)
>> return false;
>> - if (TYPE_SIZE (outer_type) && TYPE_SIZE (otr_type)
>> - && TREE_CODE (TYPE_SIZE (outer_type)) == INTEGER_CST
>> - && TREE_CODE (TYPE_SIZE (otr_type)) == INTEGER_CST
>> - && wi::ltu_p (wi::to_offset (TYPE_SIZE (outer_type)),
>> - (wi::to_offset (TYPE_SIZE (otr_type)) + offset)))
>> - return false;
>> +
>> + /* PR ipa/71207
>> + As OUTER_TYPE can be a type which has a diamond virtual inheritance,
>> + it's not necessary that INNER_TYPE will fit within OUTER_TYPE with
>> + a given offset. It can happen that INNER_TYPE also contains a base
>> object,
>> + however it would point to the same instance in the OUTER_TYPE. */
>>
>> context.offset = offset;
>> context.outer_type = TYPE_MAIN_VARIANT (outer_type);
>> context.maybe_derived_type = false;
>> context.dynamic = false;
>> - return context.restrict_to_inner_class (otr_type, consider_placement_new,
>> + return context.restrict_to_inner_class (inner_type,
>> consider_placement_new,
>> consider_bases);
>> }
>>
>> diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/ipa/pr71207.C
>> b/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/ipa/pr71207.C
>> new file mode 100644
>> index 00000000000..19a03998460
>> --- /dev/null
>> +++ b/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/ipa/pr71207.C
>> @@ -0,0 +1,42 @@
>> +/* PR ipa/71207 */
>> +/* { dg-do run } */
>> +
>> +class Class1
>> +{
>> +public:
>> + Class1() {};
>> + virtual ~Class1() {};
>> +
>> +protected:
>> + unsigned Field1;
>> +};
>> +
>> +class Class2 : public virtual Class1
>> +{
>> +};
>> +
>> +class Class3 : public virtual Class1
>> +{
>> +public:
>> + virtual void Method1() = 0;
>> +
>> + void Method2()
>> + {
>> + Method1();
>> + }
>> +};
>> +
>> +class Class4 : public Class2, public virtual Class3
>> +{
>> +public:
>> + Class4() {};
>> + virtual void Method1() {};
>> +};
>> +
>> +int main()
>> +{
>> + Class4 var1;
>> + var1.Method2();
>> +
>> + return 0;
>> +}
>> --
>> 2.11.0
>>
>
