[V4] Add warning options -W[no-]compare-distinct-pointer-types
Checks
Commit Message
[Changes from V3:
- Previous thread:
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2022-August/600625.html
- The tests have been augmented to check all six relational
operators. In particular it covers both code paths impacted
by the patch: the equality/inequality and the relational ops.]
GCC emits pedwarns unconditionally when comparing pointers of
different types, for example:
int xdp_context (struct xdp_md *xdp)
{
void *data = (void *)(long)xdp->data;
__u32 *metadata = (void *)(long)xdp->data_meta;
__u32 ret;
if (metadata + 1 > data)
return 0;
return 1;
}
/home/jemarch/foo.c: In function ‘xdp_context’:
/home/jemarch/foo.c:15:20: warning: comparison of distinct pointer types lacks a cast
15 | if (metadata + 1 > data)
| ^
LLVM supports an option -W[no-]compare-distinct-pointer-types that can
be used in order to enable or disable the emission of such warnings.
It is enabled by default.
This patch adds the same options to GCC.
Documentation and testsuite updated included.
Regtested in x86_64-linu-gnu.
No regressions observed.
gcc/ChangeLog:
PR c/106537
* doc/invoke.texi (Option Summary): Mention
-Wcompare-distinct-pointer-types under `Warning Options'.
(Warning Options): Document -Wcompare-distinct-pointer-types.
gcc/c-family/ChangeLog:
PR c/106537
* c.opt (Wcompare-distinct-pointer-types): New option.
gcc/c/ChangeLog:
PR c/106537
* c-typeck.cc (build_binary_op): Warning on comparing distinct
pointer types only when -Wcompare-distinct-pointer-types.
gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog:
PR c/106537
* gcc.c-torture/compile/pr106537-1.c: New test.
* gcc.c-torture/compile/pr106537-2.c: Likewise.
* gcc.c-torture/compile/pr106537-3.c: Likewise.
---
gcc/c-family/c.opt | 4 +++
gcc/c/c-typeck.cc | 6 ++--
gcc/doc/invoke.texi | 6 ++++
.../gcc.c-torture/compile/pr106537-1.c | 34 +++++++++++++++++++
.../gcc.c-torture/compile/pr106537-2.c | 32 +++++++++++++++++
.../gcc.c-torture/compile/pr106537-3.c | 32 +++++++++++++++++
6 files changed, 111 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
create mode 100644 gcc/testsuite/gcc.c-torture/compile/pr106537-1.c
create mode 100644 gcc/testsuite/gcc.c-torture/compile/pr106537-2.c
create mode 100644 gcc/testsuite/gcc.c-torture/compile/pr106537-3.c
Comments
On Thu, 17 Aug 2023, Jose E. Marchesi via Gcc-patches wrote:
> +@opindex Wcompare-distinct-pointer-types
> +@item -Wcompare-distinct-pointer-types
This @item should say @r{(C and Objective-C only)}, since the option isn't
implemented for C++. OK with that change.
> On Thu, 17 Aug 2023, Jose E. Marchesi via Gcc-patches wrote:
>
>> +@opindex Wcompare-distinct-pointer-types
>> +@item -Wcompare-distinct-pointer-types
>
> This @item should say @r{(C and Objective-C only)}, since the option isn't
> implemented for C++. OK with that change.
Pushed with that change.
Thanks for the prompt review!
On Thu, Aug 17, 2023 at 05:37:03PM +0200, Jose E. Marchesi via Gcc-patches wrote:
>
> > On Thu, 17 Aug 2023, Jose E. Marchesi via Gcc-patches wrote:
> >
> >> +@opindex Wcompare-distinct-pointer-types
> >> +@item -Wcompare-distinct-pointer-types
> >
> > This @item should say @r{(C and Objective-C only)}, since the option isn't
> > implemented for C++. OK with that change.
>
> Pushed with that change.
> Thanks for the prompt review!
I see the following failures:
FAIL: gcc.c-torture/compile/pr106537-1.c -Os (test for warnings, line 28)
FAIL: gcc.c-torture/compile/pr106537-1.c -Os (test for warnings, line 30)
FAIL: gcc.c-torture/compile/pr106537-1.c -O2 -flto -fno-use-linker-plugin -flto-partition=none (test for warnings, line 28)
FAIL: gcc.c-torture/compile/pr106537-1.c -O2 -flto -fno-use-linker-plugin -flto-partition=none (test for warnings, line 30)
FAIL: gcc.c-torture/compile/pr106537-1.c -O2 -flto -fuse-linker-plugin -fno-fat-lto-objects (test for warnings, line 28)
FAIL: gcc.c-torture/compile/pr106537-1.c -O2 -flto -fuse-linker-plugin -fno-fat-lto-objects (test for warnings, line 30)
FAIL: gcc.c-torture/compile/pr106537-2.c -O0 (test for warnings, line 26)
FAIL: gcc.c-torture/compile/pr106537-2.c -O0 (test for warnings, line 28)
FAIL: gcc.c-torture/compile/pr106537-2.c -O1 (test for warnings, line 26)
FAIL: gcc.c-torture/compile/pr106537-2.c -O1 (test for warnings, line 28)
FAIL: gcc.c-torture/compile/pr106537-2.c -O2 (test for warnings, line 26)
FAIL: gcc.c-torture/compile/pr106537-2.c -O2 (test for warnings, line 28)
FAIL: gcc.c-torture/compile/pr106537-2.c -O3 -g (test for warnings, line 26)
FAIL: gcc.c-torture/compile/pr106537-2.c -O3 -g (test for warnings, line 28)
FAIL: gcc.c-torture/compile/pr106537-2.c -Os (test for warnings, line 26)
FAIL: gcc.c-torture/compile/pr106537-2.c -Os (test for warnings, line 28)
FAIL: gcc.c-torture/compile/pr106537-2.c -O2 -flto -fno-use-linker-plugin -flto-partition=none (test for warnings, line 26)
FAIL: gcc.c-torture/compile/pr106537-2.c -O2 -flto -fno-use-linker-plugin -flto-partition=none (test for warnings, line 28)
FAIL: gcc.c-torture/compile/pr106537-2.c -O2 -flto -fuse-linker-plugin -fno-fat-lto-objects (test for warnings, line 26)
FAIL: gcc.c-torture/compile/pr106537-2.c -O2 -flto -fuse-linker-plugin -fno-fat-lto-objects (test for warnings, line 28)
The problem is that for ==/!=, when one of the types is void*,
build_binary_op goes to the branch attempting to warn about
comparing void* with a function pointer, and never gets to the
-Wcompare-distinct-pointer-types warning.
Marek
Hi Marek.
> On Thu, Aug 17, 2023 at 05:37:03PM +0200, Jose E. Marchesi via Gcc-patches wrote:
>>
>> > On Thu, 17 Aug 2023, Jose E. Marchesi via Gcc-patches wrote:
>> >
>> >> +@opindex Wcompare-distinct-pointer-types
>> >> +@item -Wcompare-distinct-pointer-types
>> >
>> > This @item should say @r{(C and Objective-C only)}, since the option isn't
>> > implemented for C++. OK with that change.
>>
>> Pushed with that change.
>> Thanks for the prompt review!
>
> I see the following failures:
>
> FAIL: gcc.c-torture/compile/pr106537-1.c -Os (test for warnings, line 28)
> FAIL: gcc.c-torture/compile/pr106537-1.c -Os (test for warnings, line 30)
> FAIL: gcc.c-torture/compile/pr106537-1.c -O2 -flto
> -fno-use-linker-plugin -flto-partition=none (test for warnings, line
> 28)
> FAIL: gcc.c-torture/compile/pr106537-1.c -O2 -flto
> -fno-use-linker-plugin -flto-partition=none (test for warnings, line
> 30)
> FAIL: gcc.c-torture/compile/pr106537-1.c -O2 -flto -fuse-linker-plugin
> -fno-fat-lto-objects (test for warnings, line 28)
> FAIL: gcc.c-torture/compile/pr106537-1.c -O2 -flto -fuse-linker-plugin
> -fno-fat-lto-objects (test for warnings, line 30)
> FAIL: gcc.c-torture/compile/pr106537-2.c -O0 (test for warnings, line 26)
> FAIL: gcc.c-torture/compile/pr106537-2.c -O0 (test for warnings, line 28)
> FAIL: gcc.c-torture/compile/pr106537-2.c -O1 (test for warnings, line 26)
> FAIL: gcc.c-torture/compile/pr106537-2.c -O1 (test for warnings, line 28)
> FAIL: gcc.c-torture/compile/pr106537-2.c -O2 (test for warnings, line 26)
> FAIL: gcc.c-torture/compile/pr106537-2.c -O2 (test for warnings, line 28)
> FAIL: gcc.c-torture/compile/pr106537-2.c -O3 -g (test for warnings, line 26)
> FAIL: gcc.c-torture/compile/pr106537-2.c -O3 -g (test for warnings, line 28)
> FAIL: gcc.c-torture/compile/pr106537-2.c -Os (test for warnings, line 26)
> FAIL: gcc.c-torture/compile/pr106537-2.c -Os (test for warnings, line 28)
> FAIL: gcc.c-torture/compile/pr106537-2.c -O2 -flto
> -fno-use-linker-plugin -flto-partition=none (test for warnings, line
> 26)
> FAIL: gcc.c-torture/compile/pr106537-2.c -O2 -flto
> -fno-use-linker-plugin -flto-partition=none (test for warnings, line
> 28)
> FAIL: gcc.c-torture/compile/pr106537-2.c -O2 -flto -fuse-linker-plugin
> -fno-fat-lto-objects (test for warnings, line 26)
> FAIL: gcc.c-torture/compile/pr106537-2.c -O2 -flto -fuse-linker-plugin
> -fno-fat-lto-objects (test for warnings, line 28)
>
> The problem is that for ==/!=, when one of the types is void*,
> build_binary_op goes to the branch attempting to warn about
> comparing void* with a function pointer, and never gets to the
> -Wcompare-distinct-pointer-types warning.
Oof I wonder what happened with my regtesting.
I just pushed the patch below as obvious, which adjusts the tests to
conform to GCC's behavior of not emitting that pedwarn for
equality/inequality of void pointers with non-function pointers.
Sorry about this. And thanks for reporting.
From 721f7e2c4e5eed645593258624dd91e6c39f3bd2 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: "Jose E. Marchesi" <jose.marchesi@oracle.com>
Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2023 17:10:52 +0200
Subject: [PATCH] Fix tests for PR 106537.
This patch fixes the tests for PR 106537 (support for
-W[no]-compare-distinct-pointer-types) which were expecting the
warning when checking for equality/inequality of void pointers with
non-function pointers.
gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog:
PR c/106537
* gcc.c-torture/compile/pr106537-1.c: Comparing void pointers to
non-function pointers is legit.
* gcc.c-torture/compile/pr106537-2.c: Likewise.
---
gcc/testsuite/gcc.c-torture/compile/pr106537-1.c | 6 ++++--
gcc/testsuite/gcc.c-torture/compile/pr106537-2.c | 6 ++++--
2 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.c-torture/compile/pr106537-1.c b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.c-torture/compile/pr106537-1.c
index 3f3b06577d5..b67b6090dc3 100644
--- a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.c-torture/compile/pr106537-1.c
+++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.c-torture/compile/pr106537-1.c
@@ -25,9 +25,11 @@ int xdp_context (struct xdp_md *xdp)
return 3;
if (metadata + 1 <= data) /* { dg-warning "comparison of distinct pointer types" } */
return 4;
- if (metadata + 1 == data) /* { dg-warning "comparison of distinct pointer types" } */
+ /* Note that it is ok to check for equality or inequality betewen void
+ pointers and any other non-function pointers. */
+ if ((int*) (metadata + 1) == (long*) data) /* { dg-warning "comparison of distinct pointer types" } */
return 5;
- if (metadata + 1 != data) /* { dg-warning "comparison of distinct pointer types" } */
+ if ((int*) metadata + 1 != (long*) data) /* { dg-warning "comparison of distinct pointer types" } */
return 5;
return 1;
diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.c-torture/compile/pr106537-2.c b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.c-torture/compile/pr106537-2.c
index 6876adf3aab..d4223c25c94 100644
--- a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.c-torture/compile/pr106537-2.c
+++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.c-torture/compile/pr106537-2.c
@@ -23,9 +23,11 @@ int xdp_context (struct xdp_md *xdp)
return 3;
if (metadata + 1 <= data) /* { dg-warning "comparison of distinct pointer types" } */
return 4;
- if (metadata + 1 == data) /* { dg-warning "comparison of distinct pointer types" } */
+ /* Note that it is ok to check for equality or inequality betewen void
+ pointers and any other non-function pointers. */
+ if ((int*) (metadata + 1) == (long*) data) /* { dg-warning "comparison of distinct pointer types" } */
return 5;
- if (metadata + 1 != data) /* { dg-warning "comparison of distinct pointer types" } */
+ if ((int*) metadata + 1 != (long*) data) /* { dg-warning "comparison of distinct pointer types" } */
return 5;
return 1;
@@ -1935,6 +1935,10 @@ Winvalid-imported-macros
C++ ObjC++ Var(warn_imported_macros) Warning
Warn about macros that have conflicting header units definitions.
+Wcompare-distinct-pointer-types
+C ObjC Var(warn_compare_distinct_pointer_types) Warning Init(1)
+Warn if pointers of distinct types are compared without a cast.
+
flang-info-include-translate
C++ Var(note_include_translate_yes)
Note #include directives translated to import declarations.
@@ -12772,7 +12772,7 @@ build_binary_op (location_t location, enum tree_code code,
else
/* Avoid warning about the volatile ObjC EH puts on decls. */
if (!objc_ok)
- pedwarn (location, 0,
+ pedwarn (location, OPT_Wcompare_distinct_pointer_types,
"comparison of distinct pointer types lacks a cast");
if (result_type == NULL_TREE)
@@ -12912,8 +12912,8 @@ build_binary_op (location_t location, enum tree_code code,
int qual = ENCODE_QUAL_ADDR_SPACE (as_common);
result_type = build_pointer_type
(build_qualified_type (void_type_node, qual));
- pedwarn (location, 0,
- "comparison of distinct pointer types lacks a cast");
+ pedwarn (location, OPT_Wcompare_distinct_pointer_types,
+ "comparison of distinct pointer types lacks a cast");
}
}
else if (code0 == POINTER_TYPE && null_pointer_constant_p (orig_op1))
@@ -345,6 +345,7 @@ Objective-C and Objective-C++ Dialects}.
-Wcast-align -Wcast-align=strict -Wcast-function-type -Wcast-qual
-Wchar-subscripts
-Wclobbered -Wcomment
+-Wcompare-distinct-pointer-types
-Wno-complain-wrong-lang
-Wconversion -Wno-coverage-mismatch -Wno-cpp
-Wdangling-else -Wdangling-pointer -Wdangling-pointer=@var{n}
@@ -9106,6 +9107,11 @@ The latter front end diagnoses
@samp{f951: Warning: command-line option '-fno-rtti' is valid for C++/D/ObjC++ but not for Fortran},
which may be disabled with @option{-Wno-complain-wrong-lang}.
+@opindex Wcompare-distinct-pointer-types
+@item -Wcompare-distinct-pointer-types
+Warn if pointers of distinct types are compared without a cast. This
+warning is enabled by default.
+
@opindex Wconversion
@opindex Wno-conversion
@item -Wconversion
new file mode 100644
@@ -0,0 +1,34 @@
+/* { dg-do compile }
+ { dg-options "-O0" }
+ This testcase checks that warn_compare_distinct_pointer_types is enabled by
+ default. */
+
+typedef int __u32;
+
+struct xdp_md
+{
+ char *data;
+ char *data_meta;
+};
+
+int xdp_context (struct xdp_md *xdp)
+{
+ void *data = (void *)(long)xdp->data;
+ __u32 *metadata = (void *)(long)xdp->data_meta;
+ __u32 ret;
+
+ if (metadata + 1 > data) /* { dg-warning "comparison of distinct pointer types" } */
+ return 1;
+ if (metadata + 1 >= data) /* { dg-warning "comparison of distinct pointer types" } */
+ return 2;
+ if (metadata + 1 < data) /* { dg-warning "comparison of distinct pointer types" } */
+ return 3;
+ if (metadata + 1 <= data) /* { dg-warning "comparison of distinct pointer types" } */
+ return 4;
+ if (metadata + 1 == data) /* { dg-warning "comparison of distinct pointer types" } */
+ return 5;
+ if (metadata + 1 != data) /* { dg-warning "comparison of distinct pointer types" } */
+ return 5;
+
+ return 1;
+}
new file mode 100644
@@ -0,0 +1,32 @@
+/* { dg-do compile } */
+/* { dg-options "-Wcompare-distinct-pointer-types" } */
+
+typedef int __u32;
+
+struct xdp_md
+{
+ char *data;
+ char *data_meta;
+};
+
+int xdp_context (struct xdp_md *xdp)
+{
+ void *data = (void *)(long)xdp->data;
+ __u32 *metadata = (void *)(long)xdp->data_meta;
+ __u32 ret;
+
+ if (metadata + 1 > data) /* { dg-warning "comparison of distinct pointer types" } */
+ return 1;
+ if (metadata + 1 >= data) /* { dg-warning "comparison of distinct pointer types" } */
+ return 2;
+ if (metadata + 1 < data) /* { dg-warning "comparison of distinct pointer types" } */
+ return 3;
+ if (metadata + 1 <= data) /* { dg-warning "comparison of distinct pointer types" } */
+ return 4;
+ if (metadata + 1 == data) /* { dg-warning "comparison of distinct pointer types" } */
+ return 5;
+ if (metadata + 1 != data) /* { dg-warning "comparison of distinct pointer types" } */
+ return 5;
+
+ return 1;
+}
new file mode 100644
@@ -0,0 +1,32 @@
+/* { dg-do compile } */
+/* { dg-options "-O0 -Wno-compare-distinct-pointer-types" } */
+
+typedef int __u32;
+
+struct xdp_md
+{
+ char *data;
+ char *data_meta;
+};
+
+int xdp_context (struct xdp_md *xdp)
+{
+ void *data = (void *)(long)xdp->data;
+ __u32 *metadata = (void *)(long)xdp->data_meta;
+ __u32 ret;
+
+ if (metadata + 1 > data) /* There shouldn't be a warning here. */
+ return 1;
+ if (metadata + 1 >= data) /* There shouldn't be a warning here. */
+ return 2;
+ if (metadata + 1 < data) /* There shouldn't be a warning here. */
+ return 3;
+ if (metadata + 1 <= data) /* There shouldn't be a warning here. */
+ return 4;
+ if (metadata + 1 == data) /* There shouldn't be a warning here. */
+ return 5;
+ if (metadata + 1 != data) /* There shouldn't be a warning here. */
+ return 5;
+
+ return 1;
+}