Re: [PATCH] better error message for multiple prevailing defs

[Richard Guenther <richard dot guenther at gmail dot com>]

On Sun, Jul 11, 2010 at 10:19 AM, Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org> wrote:
> I have some trouble with the linker providing multiple prevailing
> definitions for a single LTO symbol. Right now it's difficult
> to find out which symbol this even is, can be only done with the
> debugger. Fix the error message to print out the symbol.
>
> I have no svn account, so someone would need to commit it for me.
>
> -Andi
>
> 2010-07-11 ?Andi Kleen ?<ak@linux.intel.com>
>
> ? ? ? ?* lto-symtab.c (lto_symtab_merge_decls_1): Use internal_error
> ? ? ? ?instead of gcc_assert to print better error message for multiple
> ? ? ? ?prevailing defs.
>
> diff --git a/gcc/lto-symtab.c b/gcc/lto-symtab.c
> index d101449..c907723 100644
> --- a/gcc/lto-symtab.c
> +++ b/gcc/lto-symtab.c
> @@ -648,9 +648,13 @@ lto_symtab_merge_decls_1 (void **slot, void *data ATTRIBUTE_UNUSED)
>
> ? /* Assert it's the only one. ?*/
> ? if (prevailing)
> - ? ?for (e = prevailing->next; e; e = e->next)
> - ? ? ?gcc_assert (e->resolution != LDPR_PREVAILING_DEF_IRONLY
> - ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? && e->resolution != LDPR_PREVAILING_DEF);
> + ? ? ?for (e = prevailing->next; e; e = e->next)
> + ? ? ? {
> + ? ? ? ? if (e->resolution != LDPR_PREVAILING_DEF_IRONLY
> + ? ? ? ? ? ? && e->resolution != LDPR_PREVAILING_DEF)
> + ? ? ? ? ? internal_error ("multiple prevailing defs for %qE",
> + ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? DECL_NAME (prevailing->decl));

I'd say using fatal_error () here is more appropriate.

Richard.

> + ? ? ? }
>
> ? /* If there's not a prevailing symbol yet it's an external reference.
> ? ? ?Happens a lot during ltrans. ?Choose the first symbol with a
>