Ping ? Ok for trunk ?

On 01/09/14 15:17, Laurent Alfonsi wrote:
On 01/09/14 06:02, Jeff Law wrote:
On 01/08/14 02:05, Laurent Alfonsi wrote:
      All,

I was looking at PR49718. I have enclosed a simple fix for this bug report.

2014-01-07  Laurent Alfonsi <laurent.alfo...@st.com>

* c-family/c-common.c (handle_no_instrument_function_attribute): Allow
        no_instrument_function attribute in class member
definition/declaration.


Looking at the implementation of the function attributes, I see no
reason anymore to keep this error message.
Let me know if I missed something.
I have also added a testcase in the enclosed patch.

2014-01-07  Laurent Alfonsi <laurent.alfo...@st.com>

      PR c++/49718
      * g++.dg/pr49718.C: New
Isn't the idea here that if we've already generated the function body
(presumably with instrumentation) that a no-instrument attribute
appearing on a later declaration won't do anything useful?

jeff


Jeff,

You are right. That's probably the reason.
From what i can see, the code instrumentation is performed in the gimplification pass (gimplify_function_tree), and the function attribute is handled and attached earlier in the parsing phase.

I ve checked with an example like :
---8<------8<------8<------8<------8<---
int foo () {
  return 2;
}

int bar () {
  return 1;
}

int foo () __attribute__((no_instrument_function));
---8<------8<------8<------8<------8<---
The attribute is well honored on foo function.
I might need to add this test case too.

Let me know if fix is ok.

Thanks
Laurent

>From 141d2bcfeab5e0635c7f4e362387fd5b1b9494e6 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Laurent ALFONSI <laurent.alfo...@st.com>
Date: Tue, 7 Jan 2014 16:26:04 +0100
Subject: [PATCH] Fix PR49718 : allow no_instrument_function attribute in class
 member definition/declaration

---
 gcc/c-family/c-common.c        |  6 ------
 gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/pr49718.C | 41 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
 2 files changed, 41 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
 create mode 100644 gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/pr49718.C

diff --git a/gcc/c-family/c-common.c b/gcc/c-family/c-common.c
index 8ecb70c..17fcb0d 100644
--- a/gcc/c-family/c-common.c
+++ b/gcc/c-family/c-common.c
@@ -7929,12 +7929,6 @@ handle_no_instrument_function_attribute (tree *node, 
tree name,
                "%qE attribute applies only to functions", name);
       *no_add_attrs = true;
     }
-  else if (DECL_INITIAL (decl))
-    {
-      error_at (DECL_SOURCE_LOCATION (decl),
-               "can%'t set %qE attribute after definition", name);
-      *no_add_attrs = true;
-    }
   else
     DECL_NO_INSTRUMENT_FUNCTION_ENTRY_EXIT (decl) = 1;
 
diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/pr49718.C b/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/pr49718.C
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..07cac8c
--- /dev/null
+++ b/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/pr49718.C
@@ -0,0 +1,41 @@
+/* { dg-do compile } */
+/* { dg-options "-O2 -finstrument-functions" } */
+/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times "__cyg_profile_func_enter" 1} } */
+
+#define NOINSTR __attribute__((no_instrument_function))
+
+struct t
+{
+   public:
+       /* Function code should be instrumented */
+       __attribute__((noinline)) t() {}
+       
+       /* Function t::a() should not be instrumented */
+       NOINSTR void a(){
+       }
+       /* Function t::b() should not be instrumented */
+       void NOINSTR b(){
+       }
+       /* Function t::c() should not be instrumented */
+       void c() NOINSTR {
+       }
+       /* Function t::d() should not be instrumented */
+       void d() NOINSTR;
+};
+
+void t::d()
+{
+}
+
+/* Function call_all_functions() should not be instrumented */
+struct t call_all_functions() __attribute__((no_instrument_function));
+struct t call_all_functions() 
+{
+       struct t a;     /* Constructor not inlined */
+       a.a();         /* Inlined t::a() should not be instrumented */
+       a.b();         /* Inlined t::b() should not be instrumented */
+       a.c();         /* Inlined t::c() should not be instrumented */
+       a.d();         /* Inlined t::d() should not be instrumented */
+       return a;
+}
+
-- 
1.8.4.1

Reply via email to