For backwards compatiblity, we emit only a warning instead of an error if the
attribute is one of the existing type attributes that we have historically
allowed to "slide" to the `DeclSpec` just as if it had been specified in GNU
syntax. (We will call these "legacy type attributes" below.)
The high-level changes that achieve this are:
- We introduce a new field `Declarator::DeclarationAttrs` (with appropriate
accessors) to store C++11 attributes occurring in the attribute-specifier-seq
at the beginning of a simple-declaration (and other similar declarations).
Previously, these attributes were placed on the `DeclSpec`, which made it
impossible to reconstruct later on whether the attributes had in fact been
placed on the decl-specifier-seq or ahead of the declaration.
- In the parser, we propgate declaration attributes and decl-specifier-seq
attributes separately until we can place them in
`Declarator::DeclarationAttrs` or `DeclSpec::Attrs`, respectively.
- In `ProcessDeclAttributes()`, in addition to processing declarator attributes,
we now also process the attributes from `Declarator::DeclarationAttrs` (except
if they are legacy type attributes).
- In `ConvertDeclSpecToType()`, in addition to processing `DeclSpec` attributes,
we also process any legacy type attributes that occur in
`Declarator::DeclarationAttrs` (and emit a warning).
- We make `ProcessDeclAttribute` emit an error if it sees any non-declaration
attributes in C++11 syntax, except in the following cases:
- If it is being called for attributes on a `DeclSpec` or `DeclaratorChunk`
- If the attribute is a legacy type attribute (in which case we only emit
a warning)
The standard justifies treating attributes at the beginning of a
simple-declaration and attributes after a declarator-id the same. Here are some
relevant parts of the standard:
- The attribute-specifier-seq at the beginning of a simple-declaration
"appertains to each of the entities declared by the declarators of the
init-declarator-list" (https://eel.is/c++draft/dcl.dcl#dcl.pre-3)
- "In the declaration for an entity, attributes appertaining to that entity can
appear at the start of the declaration and after the declarator-id for that
declaration." (https://eel.is/c++draft/dcl.dcl#dcl.pre-note-2)
- "The optional attribute-specifier-seq following a declarator-id appertains to
the entity that is declared."
(https://eel.is/c++draft/dcl.dcl#dcl.meaning.general-1)
The standard contains similar wording to that for a simple-declaration in other
similar types of declarations, for example:
- "The optional attribute-specifier-seq in a parameter-declaration appertains to
the parameter." (https://eel.is/c++draft/dcl.fct#3)
- "The optional attribute-specifier-seq in an exception-declaration appertains
to the parameter of the catch clause" (https://eel.is/c++draft/except.pre#1)
The new behavior is tested both on the newly added type attribute
`annotate_type`, for which we emit errors, and for the legacy type attribute
`address_space` (chosen somewhat randomly from the various legacy type
attributes), for which we emit warnings.
Depends On D111548
Reviewed By: aaron.ballman, rsmith
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D126061
A significant number of our tests in C accidentally use functions
without prototypes. This patch converts the function signatures to have
a prototype for the situations where the test is not specific to K&R C
declarations. e.g.,
void func();
becomes
void func(void);
This is the fourth batch of tests being updated (there are a significant
number of other tests left to be updated).
Summary:
The parsing of GNU C extended asm statements was a little brittle and
had a few issues:
- It was using Parse::ParseTypeQualifierListOpt to parse the `volatile`
qualifier. That parser is really meant for TypeQualifiers; an asm
statement doesn't really have a type qualifier. This is still maybe
nice to have, but not necessary. We now can check for the `volatile`
token by properly expanding the grammer, rather than abusing
Parse::ParseTypeQualifierListOpt.
- The parsing of `goto` was position dependent, so `asm goto volatile`
wouldn't parse. The qualifiers should be position independent to one
another. Now they are.
- We would warn on duplicate `volatile`, but the parse error for
duplicate `goto` was a generic parse error and wasn't clear.
- We need to add support for the recent GNU C extension `asm inline`.
Adding support to the parser with the above issues highlighted the
need for this refactoring.
Link: https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/Extended-Asm.html
Reviewers: aaron.ballman
Reviewed By: aaron.ballman
Subscribers: aheejin, jfb, nathanchance, cfe-commits, echristo, efriedma, rsmith, chandlerc, craig.topper, erichkeane, jyu2, void, srhines
Tags: #clang
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D75563
An empty string literal in an asm label does not make a whole lot of sense. GCC
does not diagnose such a construct, but it also generates code that cannot be
assembled by gas should two symbols have an empty asm label within the same TU.
This does not affect an asm statement with an empty string literal, which is
still a useful construct.
Syntax:
asm [volatile] goto ( AssemblerTemplate
:
: InputOperands
: Clobbers
: GotoLabels)
https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/Extended-Asm.html
New llvm IR is "callbr" for inline asm goto instead "call" for inline asm
For:
asm goto("testl %0, %0; jne %l1;" :: "r"(cond)::label_true, loop);
IR:
callbr void asm sideeffect "testl $0, $0; jne ${1:l};", "r,X,X,~{dirflag},~{fpsr},~{flags}"(i32 %0, i8* blockaddress(@foo, %label_true), i8* blockaddress(@foo, %loop)) #1
to label %asm.fallthrough [label %label_true, label %loop], !srcloc !3
asm.fallthrough:
Compiler need to generate:
1> a dummy constarint 'X' for each label.
2> an unique fallthrough label for each asm goto stmt " asm.fallthrough%number".
Diagnostic
1> duplicate asm operand name are used in output, input and label.
2> goto out of scope.
llvm-svn: 362045
This can be used for better support of `-fno-gnu-inline-asm` builds.
rdar://problem/49540880
Reviewers: aaron.ballman, rsmith
Reviewed By: aaron.ballman
Subscribers: eraman, jkorous, dexonsmith, craig.topper, cfe-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D61619
llvm-svn: 360625
When parsing invalid top-level asm statements, we were ignoring the
return code of the SkipUntil we used for recovery. This led to crashes
when we hit the end of file and tried to continue parsing anyway.
This fixes the crash and adds a couple of tests for parsing related
problems.
llvm-svn: 196961
- This is designed to make it obvious that %clang_cc1 is a "test variable"
which is substituted. It is '%clang_cc1' instead of '%clang -cc1' because it
can be useful to redefine what gets run as 'clang -cc1' (for example, to set
a default target).
llvm-svn: 91446
Martin Boehme