[Bug lto/88112] [9 regression] ICE in lto1: TYPE_FIELDS defined in incomplete type

["rguenther at suse dot de" <gcc-bugzilla at gcc dot gnu dot org>]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88112

--- Comment #6 from rguenther at suse dot de <rguenther at suse dot de> ---
On Tue, 20 Nov 2018, ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:

> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88112
> 
> --- Comment #4 from Eric Botcazou <ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
> > Index: gcc/tree.c
> > ===================================================================
> > --- gcc/tree.c  (revision 266308)
> > +++ gcc/tree.c  (working copy)
> > @@ -5260,7 +5260,7 @@ free_lang_data_in_one_sizepos (tree *exp
> >       Note this should only happen for abstract copies so setting sizes
> >       to NULL is OK (but we cannot easily assert this).  */
> >    else if (expr && !is_gimple_val (expr))
> > -    *expr_p = NULL_TREE;
> > +    *expr_p = build0 (PLACEHOLDER_EXPR, TREE_TYPE (expr));
> >  }
> >  
> >  
> > fixes the ICE but not sure if that's good.  Setting to size_zero_node
> > also works (so much for "proper" type checking ...).  Maybe it's better
> > to adjust the type-checker somehow?
> 
> The C++ front-end should be fixed instead, i.e. it should gimplify all the size
> expressions (like the Ada front-end does).

It's a type that only lives in the abstract origin which is never output,
so the FE somewhat has a point in not needing to gimplify it (similar
to the Ada case with gloal types that cannot be gimplified).

Can Ada global types ever have CALL_EXPRs in their size expressions?