Hi! On Fri, 29 Mar 2019 at 20:02, Jeff Law <l...@redhat.com> wrote: > > On 3/29/19 9:09 AM, Jason Merrill wrote: > > On Fri, Mar 29, 2019 at 4:48 AM Richard Biener <rguent...@suse.de> wrote: > >> > >> On Thu, 28 Mar 2019, Jason Merrill wrote: > >> > >>> On 3/26/19 4:40 AM, Richard Biener wrote: > >>>> On Mon, 18 Mar 2019, Richard Biener wrote: > >>>> > >>>>> On Fri, 15 Mar 2019, Jason Merrill wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>>> On 3/15/19 9:33 AM, Richard Biener wrote: > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> The following is an attempt to fix PR71598 where C (and C++?) have > >>>>>>> an implementation-defined compatible integer type for each enum > >>>>>>> and the TBAA rules mandate that accesses using a compatible type > >>>>>>> are allowed. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> This does not apply to C++; an enum does not alias its underlying type. > >>>>> > >>>>> Thus the following different patch, introducing c_get_alias_set and > >>>>> only doing the special handling for C family frontends (I assume > >>>>> that at least ObjC is also affected). > >>>>> > >>>>> Bootstrap & regtest running on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu, OK? > >>>> > >>>> Ping. Also consider the additional testcase below to be added. > >>>> > >>>> Richard. > >>>> > >>>> 2019-03-18 Richard Biener <rguent...@suse.de> > >>>> > >>>> PR c/71598 > >>>> * gimple.c: Include langhooks.h. > >>>> (gimple_get_alias_set): Treat enumeral types as the underlying > >>>> integer type. > >>> > >>> Won't this affect all languages? > >> > >> It affects all languages during the LTO optimization phase, yes. > >> There's unfortunately no way around that at the moment. > > > > Ah, well. Looks good to me, then. > Likewise. And with Joseph largely offline right now, that's going to > have to be sufficient :-) >
I've noticed minor new errors at link time on arm with the 2 new testcases. pr71598-1.c complains on arm-none-eabi because arm-none-eabi/bin/ld: warning: /ccu5w26t.o uses 32-bit enums yet the output is to use variable-size enums; use of enum values across objects may fail conversely, pr71598-2.c complains on arm-none-linux-gnueabi* because: arm-none-linux-gnueabi/bin/ld: warning: /ccl5OUKi.o uses variable-size enums yet the output is to use 32-bit enums; use of enum values across objects may fail In both cases this is because crt0.o is built with the opposite (default) short-enum option than the testcase, so the linker sees a mismatch between crt0.o and pr71598-X.o. Shall I add target-dependent dg-warning directives in the testcases, or is there a better way? Thanks, Christophe > jeff
