1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
|
https://bugs.gentoo.org/894174
https://sourceware.org/git/?p=binutils-gdb.git;a=commit;h=ae61525fcf456ab395d55c45492a106d1275873a
From ae61525fcf456ab395d55c45492a106d1275873a Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Simon Marchi <simon.marchi@efficios.com>
Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2023 12:35:40 -0500
Subject: [PATCH] gdbsupport: ignore -Wenum-constexpr-conversion in
enum-flags.h
When building with clang 16, we get:
CXX gdb.o
In file included from /home/smarchi/src/binutils-gdb/gdb/gdb.c:19:
In file included from /home/smarchi/src/binutils-gdb/gdb/defs.h:65:
/home/smarchi/src/binutils-gdb/gdb/../gdbsupport/enum-flags.h:95:52: error: integer value -1 is outside the valid range of values [0, 15] for this enumeration type [-Wenum-constexpr-conversion]
integer_for_size<sizeof (T), static_cast<bool>(T (-1) < T (0))>::type
^
The error message does not make it clear in the context of which enum
flag this fails (i.e. what is T in this context), but it doesn't really
matter, we have similar warning/errors for many of them, if we let the
build go through.
clang is right that the value -1 is invalid for the enum type we cast -1
to. However, we do need this expression in order to select an integer
type with the appropriate signedness. That is, with the same signedness
as the underlying type of the enum.
I first wondered if that was really needed, if we couldn't use
std::underlying_type for that. It turns out that the comment just above
says:
/* Note that std::underlying_type<enum_type> is not what we want here,
since that returns unsigned int even when the enum decays to signed
int. */
I was surprised, because std::is_signed<std::underlying_type<enum_type>>
returns the right thing. So I tried replacing all this with
std::underlying_type, see if that would work. Doing so causes some
build failures in unittests/enum-flags-selftests.c:
CXX unittests/enum-flags-selftests.o
/home/smarchi/src/binutils-gdb/gdb/unittests/enum-flags-selftests.c:254:1: error: static assertion failed due to requirement 'gdb::is_same<selftests::enum_flags_tests::check_valid_expr254::archetype<enum_flags<s
elftests::enum_flags_tests::RE>, selftests::enum_flags_tests::RE, enum_flags<selftests::enum_flags_tests::RE2>, selftests::enum_flags_tests::RE2, enum_flags<selftests::enum_flags_tests::URE>, selftests::enum_fla
gs_tests::URE, int>, selftests::enum_flags_tests::check_valid_expr254::archetype<enum_flags<selftests::enum_flags_tests::RE>, selftests::enum_flags_tests::RE, enum_flags<selftests::enum_flags_tests::RE2>, selfte
sts::enum_flags_tests::RE2, enum_flags<selftests::enum_flags_tests::URE>, selftests::enum_flags_tests::URE, unsigned int>>::value == true':
CHECK_VALID (true, int, true ? EF () : EF2 ())
^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
/home/smarchi/src/binutils-gdb/gdb/unittests/enum-flags-selftests.c:91:3: note: expanded from macro 'CHECK_VALID'
CHECK_VALID_EXPR_6 (EF, RE, EF2, RE2, UEF, URE, VALID, EXPR_TYPE, EXPR)
^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
/home/smarchi/src/binutils-gdb/gdb/../gdbsupport/valid-expr.h:105:3: note: expanded from macro 'CHECK_VALID_EXPR_6'
CHECK_VALID_EXPR_INT (ESC_PARENS (typename T1, typename T2, \
^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
/home/smarchi/src/binutils-gdb/gdb/../gdbsupport/valid-expr.h:66:3: note: expanded from macro 'CHECK_VALID_EXPR_INT'
static_assert (gdb::is_detected_exact<archetype<TYPES, EXPR_TYPE>, \
^ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
This is a bit hard to decode, but basically enumerations have the
following funny property that they decay into a signed int, even if
their implicit underlying type is unsigned. This code:
enum A {};
enum B {};
int main() {
std::cout << std::is_signed<std::underlying_type<A>::type>::value
<< std::endl;
std::cout << std::is_signed<std::underlying_type<B>::type>::value
<< std::endl;
auto result = true ? A() : B();
std::cout << std::is_signed<decltype(result)>::value << std::endl;
}
produces:
0
0
1
So, the "CHECK_VALID" above checks that this property works for enum flags the
same way as it would if you were using their underlying enum types. And
somehow, changing integer_for_size to use std::underlying_type breaks that.
Since the current code does what we want, and I don't see any way of doing it
differently, ignore -Wenum-constexpr-conversion around it.
Change-Id: Ibc82ae7bbdb812102ae3f1dd099fc859dc6f3cc2
--- a/gdbsupport/enum-flags.h
+++ b/gdbsupport/enum-flags.h
@@ -91,9 +91,12 @@ template<> struct integer_for_size<8, 1> { typedef int64_t type; };
template<typename T>
struct enum_underlying_type
{
+ DIAGNOSTIC_PUSH
+ DIAGNOSTIC_IGNORE_ENUM_CONSTEXPR_CONVERSION
typedef typename
integer_for_size<sizeof (T), static_cast<bool>(T (-1) < T (0))>::type
type;
+ DIAGNOSTIC_POP
};
namespace enum_flags_detail
--- a/include/diagnostics.h
+++ b/include/diagnostics.h
@@ -76,6 +76,11 @@
# define DIAGNOSTIC_ERROR_SWITCH \
DIAGNOSTIC_ERROR ("-Wswitch")
+# if __has_warning ("-Wenum-constexpr-conversion")
+# define DIAGNOSTIC_IGNORE_ENUM_CONSTEXPR_CONVERSION \
+ DIAGNOSTIC_IGNORE ("-Wenum-constexpr-conversion")
+# endif
+
#elif defined (__GNUC__) /* GCC */
# define DIAGNOSTIC_IGNORE_DEPRECATED_DECLARATIONS \
@@ -155,4 +160,8 @@
# define DIAGNOSTIC_ERROR_SWITCH
#endif
+#ifndef DIAGNOSTIC_IGNORE_ENUM_CONSTEXPR_CONVERSION
+# define DIAGNOSTIC_IGNORE_ENUM_CONSTEXPR_CONVERSION
+#endif
+
#endif /* DIAGNOSTICS_H */
--
2.31.1
|
