r247618 - C11 _Bool bitfield diagnostic
Richard Smith via cfe-commits
cfe-commits at lists.llvm.org
Fri Sep 18 22:19:29 PDT 2015
On Fri, Sep 18, 2015 at 8:49 PM, Nico Weber <thakis at chromium.org> wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 18, 2015 at 5:06 PM, Richard Smith <richard at metafoo.co.uk>
> wrote:
>
>> On Wed, Sep 16, 2015 at 5:33 PM, Richard Smith <richard at metafoo.co.uk>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> On Wed, Sep 16, 2015 at 5:27 PM, Nico Weber via cfe-commits <
>>> cfe-commits at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Tue, Sep 15, 2015 at 5:50 PM, Richard Smith <richard at metafoo.co.uk>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On Tue, Sep 15, 2015 at 12:38 PM, Nico Weber <thakis at 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`?
>
I don't think it makes sense to treat bool : 3 and bool : 16 differently.
The fact that an unadorned bool would occupy 8 bits doesn't seem relevant
to whether we should warn. Either we warn that there are padding bits, or
we don't.
> , 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 <richard at metafoo.co.uk>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Mon, Sep 14, 2015 at 7:07 PM, Rachel Craik <rcraik at 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 at metafo]Nico
>>>>>>>> Weber ---09/14/2015 09:53:25 PM---On Mon, Sep 14, 2015 at 5:28 PM, Richard
>>>>>>>> Smith <richard at metafoo.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> From: Nico Weber <thakis at chromium.org>
>>>>>>>> To: Richard Smith <richard at metafoo.co.uk>
>>>>>>>> Cc: Rachel Craik/Toronto/IBM at IBMCA, cfe-commits <
>>>>>>>> cfe-commits at lists.llvm.org>
>>>>>>>> Date: 09/14/2015 09:53 PM
>>>>>>>> Subject: Re: r247618 - C11 _Bool bitfield diagnostic
>>>>>>>> Sent by: thakis at google.com
>>>>>>>> ------------------------------
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Mon, Sep 14, 2015 at 5:28 PM, Richard Smith <
>>>>>>>> *richard at metafoo.co.uk* <richard at metafoo.co.uk>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Mon, Sep 14, 2015 at 5:18 PM, Nico Weber via cfe-commits <
>>>>>>>> *cfe-commits at lists.llvm.org* <cfe-commits at 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 at lists.llvm.org* <cfe-commits at 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 at lists.llvm.org* <cfe-commits at 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 at lists.llvm.org* <cfe-commits at 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 at lists.llvm.org
>>>> http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/cfe-commits/attachments/20150918/6c5617a6/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: graycol.gif
Type: image/gif
Size: 105 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/cfe-commits/attachments/20150918/6c5617a6/attachment-0001.gif>
More information about the cfe-commits
mailing list