This is the mail archive of the gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

[c++ PATCH] PR 29087 (ice on valid code)


:ADDPATCH C++:

Hello,

This patch fixes a C++ regression where we ICE due to too deep recursion
in the parser.  Fixed by removing the recursion.

Bootstrapped c,c++,java and tested c++,java on x86_64-suse-linux-gnu.

I don't see much point in adding a test case because failure depends so
much on the machine stack size.  But I can put the test case I added in
the audit trail (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29087#c6)
to the test suite if people want me to.

OK for trunk, and for the GCC 4.1 branch?

Gr.
Steven

	* parser.c (cp_parser_labeled_statement): Return nothing.
	Rename to cp_parser_label_for_labeled_statement.  Parse only
	the label, not the statement.
	(cp_parser_statement): Parse the statement of a labeled-statement
	from here, using tail recursion.

Index: parser.c
===================================================================
--- parser.c	(revision 116991)
+++ parser.c	(working copy)
@@ -1451,8 +1451,8 @@ static tree cp_parser_builtin_offsetof
 
 static void cp_parser_statement
   (cp_parser *, tree, bool);
-static tree cp_parser_labeled_statement
-  (cp_parser *, tree, bool);
+static void cp_parser_label_for_labeled_statement
+  (cp_parser *);
 static tree cp_parser_expression_statement
   (cp_parser *, tree);
 static tree cp_parser_compound_statement
@@ -6117,9 +6117,11 @@ cp_parser_statement (cp_parser* parser, 
 	{
 	case RID_CASE:
 	case RID_DEFAULT:
-	  statement = cp_parser_labeled_statement (parser, in_statement_expr,
-						   in_compound);
-	  break;
+	  /* Looks like a labeled-statement with a case label.
+	     Parse the label, and then use tail recursion to parse
+	     the statement.  */
+	  cp_parser_label_for_labeled_statement (parser);
+	  goto restart;
 
 	case RID_IF:
 	case RID_SWITCH:
@@ -6164,8 +6166,13 @@ cp_parser_statement (cp_parser* parser, 
 	 labeled-statement.  */
       token = cp_lexer_peek_nth_token (parser->lexer, 2);
       if (token->type == CPP_COLON)
-	statement = cp_parser_labeled_statement (parser, in_statement_expr,
-						 in_compound);
+	{
+	  /* Looks like a labeled-statement with an ordinary label.
+	     Parse the label, and then use tail recursion to parse
+	     the statement.  */
+	  cp_parser_label_for_labeled_statement (parser);
+	  goto restart;
+	}
     }
   /* Anything that starts with a `{' must be a compound-statement.  */
   else if (token->type == CPP_OPEN_BRACE)
@@ -6215,7 +6222,7 @@ cp_parser_statement (cp_parser* parser, 
     SET_EXPR_LOCATION (statement, statement_location);
 }
 
-/* Parse a labeled-statement.
+/* Parse the label of a labeled-statement.
 
    labeled-statement:
      identifier : statement
@@ -6227,18 +6234,25 @@ cp_parser_statement (cp_parser* parser, 
    labeled-statement:
      case constant-expression ... constant-expression : statement
 
-   Returns the new CASE_LABEL_EXPR, for a `case' or `default' label.
-   For an ordinary label, returns a LABEL_EXPR.
-
-   IN_COMPOUND is as for cp_parser_statement: true when we're nested
-   inside a compound.  */
+   This function is only called by cp_parser_statement.  We can use
+   this to avoid extremely deep recursion (e.g. PR29087): In this
+   function we only parse up to `statement', and then we return to
+   cp_parser_statement to parse `statement' there.  So the bits we
+   parse here are:
+
+   identifier :
+   case constant-expression :
+   case constant-expression ... constant-expression :
+   default :
+
+   When a label is parsed without errors, the label is added to the
+   parse tree by the finish_* functions, so this function doesn't
+   have to return the label.  */
 
-static tree
-cp_parser_labeled_statement (cp_parser* parser, tree in_statement_expr,
-			     bool in_compound)
+static void
+cp_parser_label_for_labeled_statement (cp_parser* parser)
 {
   cp_token *token;
-  tree statement = error_mark_node;
 
   /* The next token should be an identifier.  */
   token = cp_lexer_peek_token (parser->lexer);
@@ -6246,7 +6260,7 @@ cp_parser_labeled_statement (cp_parser* 
       && token->type != CPP_KEYWORD)
     {
       cp_parser_error (parser, "expected labeled-statement");
-      return error_mark_node;
+      return;
     }
 
   switch (token->keyword)
@@ -6279,7 +6293,7 @@ cp_parser_labeled_statement (cp_parser* 
 	  expr_hi = NULL_TREE;
 
 	if (parser->in_switch_statement_p)
-	  statement = finish_case_label (expr, expr_hi);
+	  finish_case_label (expr, expr_hi);
 	else
 	  error ("case label %qE not within a switch statement", expr);
       }
@@ -6290,24 +6304,19 @@ cp_parser_labeled_statement (cp_parser* 
       cp_lexer_consume_token (parser->lexer);
 
       if (parser->in_switch_statement_p)
-	statement = finish_case_label (NULL_TREE, NULL_TREE);
+	finish_case_label (NULL_TREE, NULL_TREE);
       else
 	error ("case label not within a switch statement");
       break;
 
     default:
       /* Anything else must be an ordinary label.  */
-      statement = finish_label_stmt (cp_parser_identifier (parser));
+      finish_label_stmt (cp_parser_identifier (parser));
       break;
     }
 
   /* Require the `:' token.  */
   cp_parser_require (parser, CPP_COLON, "`:'");
-  /* Parse the labeled statement.  */
-  cp_parser_statement (parser, in_statement_expr, in_compound);
-
-  /* Return the label, in the case of a `case' or `default' label.  */
-  return statement;
 }
 
 /* Parse an expression-statement.



Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]