This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: C++ PATCH for c++/86608, reading constexpr volatile variable
On Tue, Dec 11, 2018 at 10:26:00AM -0500, Jason Merrill wrote:
> On 12/10/18 8:48 PM, Marek Polacek wrote:
> > A template-argument for a non-type template-parameter shall be a converted
> > constant expression. But an lvalue-to-rvalue conversion applied to a volatile
> > glvalue is not allowed to be part of the evaluation of a constant expression.
> > So this test should be rejected.
>
> It occurred to me after my note on IRC that the
> potential_constant_expression_1 test we were talking about,
>
> if (TREE_THIS_VOLATILE (t) && !DECL_P (t))
>
> ought to test want_rval rather than !DECL_P so that we consistently reject
> the lvalue-to-rvalue conversion, and not other uses of a volatile lvalue.
> And the diagnostic ought to talk about that rather than "side-effects".
Done.
> It might still be appropriate to change non_const_var_error, but I'd think
> it could check TREE_THIS_VOLATILE itself, rather than the caller; I don't
> see a need for the two calls to differ in their handling of volatile
> variables.
This change was no longer needed...
> Perhaps decl_maybe_constant_var_p should return false for constexpr
> volatile, as well.
...neither was this but I did it all the same because I think it's reasonable.
Like I said, not planning to backport it, but I could be easily convinced.
Bootstrapped/regtested on x86_64-linux, ok for trunk?
2018-12-11 Marek Polacek <polacek@redhat.com>
PR c++/86608 - reading constexpr volatile variable.
* constexpr.c (potential_constant_expression_1): Check want_rval
instead of checking if we have a decl.
* decl2.c (decl_maybe_constant_var_p): Don't consider volatile
constexpr variables as maybe constant.
* g++.dg/cpp0x/constexpr-volatile2.C: New test.
* g++.dg/cpp0x/pr65327.C: Add dg-error.
diff --git gcc/cp/constexpr.c gcc/cp/constexpr.c
index 1c844a8c2ef..44db38029bf 100644
--- gcc/cp/constexpr.c
+++ gcc/cp/constexpr.c
@@ -5476,10 +5476,11 @@ potential_constant_expression_1 (tree t, bool want_rval, bool strict, bool now,
available, so we don't bother with switch tracking. */
return true;
- if (TREE_THIS_VOLATILE (t) && !DECL_P (t))
+ if (TREE_THIS_VOLATILE (t) && want_rval)
{
if (flags & tf_error)
- error_at (loc, "expression %qE has side-effects", t);
+ error_at (loc, "lvalue-to-rvalue conversion of a volatile lvalue "
+ "%qE with type %qT", t, TREE_TYPE (t));
return false;
}
if (CONSTANT_CLASS_P (t))
diff --git gcc/cp/decl2.c gcc/cp/decl2.c
index a8bf28a0cd9..1b3e758b625 100644
--- gcc/cp/decl2.c
+++ gcc/cp/decl2.c
@@ -4313,7 +4313,7 @@ decl_maybe_constant_var_p (tree decl)
tree type = TREE_TYPE (decl);
if (!VAR_P (decl))
return false;
- if (DECL_DECLARED_CONSTEXPR_P (decl))
+ if (DECL_DECLARED_CONSTEXPR_P (decl) && !TREE_THIS_VOLATILE (decl))
return true;
if (DECL_HAS_VALUE_EXPR_P (decl))
/* A proxy isn't constant. */
diff --git gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp0x/constexpr-volatile2.C gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp0x/constexpr-volatile2.C
new file mode 100644
index 00000000000..0def8d73731
--- /dev/null
+++ gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp0x/constexpr-volatile2.C
@@ -0,0 +1,13 @@
+// PR c++/86608
+// { dg-do compile { target c++11 } }
+
+template<typename T, T v> struct X {};
+
+int
+main ()
+{
+ static constexpr volatile int a = 3;
+ constexpr volatile int b = 2;
+ return (sizeof(X<decltype(a), a>) // { dg-error "lvalue-to-rvalue conversion of a volatile lvalue" }
+ + sizeof(X<decltype(b), b>)); // { dg-error "lvalue-to-rvalue conversion of a volatile lvalue" }
+}
diff --git gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp0x/pr65327.C gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp0x/pr65327.C
index c6cefaba692..5176b3c3204 100644
--- gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp0x/pr65327.C
+++ gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp0x/pr65327.C
@@ -15,4 +15,4 @@ constexpr volatile int
bar ()
{
return i;
-}
+} // { dg-error "lvalue-to-rvalue conversion of a volatile lvalue" }