[clang] [clang][Sema] Fix incomplete C mode incompatible ExtInfo/ExtProtoInfo conversion diagnostic (PR #160477)

[Bruno De Fraine via cfe-commits]

================
@@ -9187,12 +9187,43 @@ static AssignConvertType checkPointerTypesForAssignment(Sema &S,
       return AssignConvertType::IncompatibleFunctionPointer;
     return AssignConvertType::IncompatiblePointer;
   }
-  bool DiscardingCFIUncheckedCallee, AddingCFIUncheckedCallee;
-  if (!S.getLangOpts().CPlusPlus &&
-      S.IsFunctionConversion(ltrans, rtrans, &DiscardingCFIUncheckedCallee,
-                             &AddingCFIUncheckedCallee)) {
-    // Allow conversions between CFIUncheckedCallee-ness.
-    if (!DiscardingCFIUncheckedCallee && !AddingCFIUncheckedCallee)
+  const auto *LFT = ltrans->getAs<FunctionType>();
+  const auto *RFT = rtrans->getAs<FunctionType>();
+  if (!S.getLangOpts().CPlusPlus && LFT && RFT) {
+    // The invocation of IsFunctionConversion below will try to transform rtrans
+    // to obtain an exact match for ltrans. This should not fail because of
+    // mismatches in result type and parameter types, they were already checked
+    // by typesAreCompatible above. So we will recreate rtrans using the result
+    // type and parameter types from ltrans, but keeping its
+    // ExtInfo/ExtProtoInfo.
+    const auto *LFPT = dyn_cast<FunctionProtoType>(LFT);
+    const auto *RFPT = dyn_cast<FunctionProtoType>(RFT);
+    if (LFPT && RFPT) {
+      rtrans = S.Context.getFunctionType(LFPT->getReturnType(),
+                                         LFPT->getParamTypes(),
+                                         RFPT->getExtProtoInfo());
+    } else if (LFPT) {
+      FunctionProtoType::ExtProtoInfo EPI;
+      EPI.ExtInfo = RFT->getExtInfo();
+      rtrans = S.Context.getFunctionType(LFPT->getReturnType(),
+                                         LFPT->getParamTypes(), EPI);
+    } else if (RFPT) {
+      // In this case, we want to retain rtrans as a FunctionProtoType, to keep
+      // all of its ExtProtoInfo. To enable an exact match, we recreate ltrans
+      // as a FunctionProtoType, using its own info but filling in the parameter
+      // types from rtrans.
+      FunctionProtoType::ExtProtoInfo EPI;
+      EPI.ExtInfo = LFT->getExtInfo();
+      ltrans = S.Context.getFunctionType(LFT->getReturnType(),
+                                         RFPT->getParamTypes(), EPI);
+      rtrans = S.Context.getFunctionType(
+          LFT->getReturnType(), RFPT->getParamTypes(), RFPT->getExtProtoInfo());
+    } else {
+      rtrans = S.Context.getFunctionNoProtoType(LFT->getReturnType(),
+                                                RFT->getExtInfo());
+    }
+    if (!S.Context.hasSameUnqualifiedType(rtrans, ltrans) &&
+        !S.IsFunctionConversion(rtrans, ltrans))
----------------
brunodf-snps wrote:

Yes, but `IsFunctionConversion` returns false when `hasSameUnqualifiedType`. Unless that behavior can be changed, I have to check for this case upfront.

https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/160477