Nicolai Stange <nicstange@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
> Here comes the greatly enhanced v3 of this series.
Just a gently push to get some reviews on this...
>
> Luc's suggestions about splitting some patches turned out to be very fruitful!
>
> Former [01/13] ("expression: introduce additional expression constness tracking flags")
> has been split into
> - [01/21] ("expression: introduce additional expression constness tracking flags")
> - [02/21] ("expression: init constexpr_flags at expression allocation")
> - [07/21] ("expression: add support for tagging arithmetic constant expressions")
>
> In particular, the introduction of the arithmetic constant expression
> flag is deferred until the last one of these three. This addresses
> Luc's concerns that the arithmetic constant expression handlings
> within the v2 "examine constness of XXX at evaluation only"-patches
> should better get split off into a separate patch each.
>
>
> Former [06/13] ("expression, evaluate: add support for recognizing address constants")
> has been split into
> - [08/21] ("expression, evaluate: add support for tagging address constants")
> - [10/21] ("expression, evaluate: recognize static objects as address constants")
> - [12/21] ("evaluate: recognize address constants created through pointer arithmetic")
> - [13/21] ("evaluate: recognize members of static compound objects as address constants")
> - [14/21] ("evaluate: recognize string literals as address constants")
>
> The address constant handling part from former
> [02/13] ("expression: examine constness of casts at evaluation only")
> has been extracted into a patch on its own, namely
> [11/21] ("evaluate: recognize address constants created through casts")
>
> Patches [10-14/21] have been placed just until after static initializer checking
> has been introduced in
> [09/21] ("evaluate: check static storage duration objects' intializers' constness").
> This way, the monster testcase from former
> [07/13] ("evaluate: check static storage duration objects' intializers' constness")
> can be split and the individual tests attached to the different
> patches as appropriate.
>
>
> Note that we still have got this
> [20/21] ("symbol: do not inherit storage modifiers from base types at examination")
> thing.
>
>
> Detailed changes:
> [01/21] ("expression: introduce additional expression constness tracking flags"):
> - The expr_{set,clear}_flag() helpers have been replaced by bitmasks
> to be ored in or anded outnow.
> - Renamed ->flags to ->constexpr_flags
> - ->constexpr_flags initialization at expression allocation has been
> extracted into
> [02/21] ("expression: init constexpr_flags at expression allocation")
> - neither of the arithmetic constant expression flag nor address nor the
> address constant flag gets introduced by this patch anymore.
> They get introduced in
> [07/21] ("expression: add support for tagging arithmetic constant expressions")
> [08/21] ("expression, evaluate: add support for tagging address constants")
> as needed.
> - Luc's remarks about the 'sic' comments carried over from the original
> code have been addressed in the new
> [21/21] ("evaluation: treat comparsions between types as integer constexpr")
> - Changes to patch description as suggested by Luc.
> - Tag a TOKEN_ZERO_IDENT by integer constant instead of integer
> constant expression. Feels more natural but should not matter.
>
> [02/21] ("expression: init constexpr_flags at expression allocation")
> This one is new. Split off from former [01/13].
>
> [03-06/21] ("expression: examine constness of XXX at evaluation only")
> Adjusted patch descriptions as suggested by Luc.
>
> [07/21] ("expression: add support for tagging arithmetic constant expressions")
> This one is new. Split off from former [01/13].
>
> [08/21] ("expression, evaluate: add support for tagging address constants")
> Split off actual recognition of various address constant forms into
> separate patches [10-14/21]
>
> [09/21] ("evaluate: check static storage duration objects' intializers' constness").
> - -W-flag has been renamed to -Wconstexpr-not-const
> - the associated warning message has been shortened to
> "non-constant initializer for static object".
> - the attached testcase has been greatly reduced as the tests are now
> attached to the patches [10-14/21].
>
> [10-14/21]
> These ones are new and split off from former
> [06/13] ("expression, evaluate: add support for tagging address constants")
> They implement actual address constant recognition functionality.
>
> In
> [12/21] ("evaluate: recognize address constants created through pointer arithmetic")
> a whitespace issue from former
> [06/13] ("expression, evaluate: add support for recognizing address constants")
> in an if-clause has been fixed.
>
>
> [15/21] ("expression: recognize references to labels as address constants")
> A testcase for has been added.
>
>
> [19/21] ("evaluate: relax some constant expression rules for pointer expressions")
> A typo ("adress") has been fixed.
>
> [21/21] ("evaluation: treat comparsions between types as integer constexpr")
> This one is new.
>
>
> Nicolai Stange (21):
> expression: introduce additional expression constness tracking flags
> expression: init constexpr_flags at expression allocation
> expression: examine constness of casts at evaluation only
> expression: examine constness of binops and alike at evaluation only
> expression: examine constness of preops at evaluation only
> expression: examine constness of conditionals at evaluation only
> expression: add support for tagging arithmetic constant expressions
> expression, evaluate: add support for tagging address constants
> evaluate: check static storage duration objects' intializers'
> constness
> expression, evaluate: recognize static objects as address constants
> evaluate: recognize address constants created through casts
> evaluate: recognize address constants created through pointer
> arithmetic
> evaluate: recognize members of static compound objects as address
> constants
> evaluate: recognize string literals as address constants
> expression: recognize references to labels as address constants
> expression: examine constness of __builtin_offsetof at evaluation only
> symbol: flag builtins constant_p, safe_p and warning as constexprs
> evaluate: relax some constant expression rules for pointer expressions
> expression, evaluate: support compound literals as address constants
> symbol: do not inherit storage modifiers from base types at
> examination
> evaluation: treat comparsions between types as integer constexpr
>
> evaluate.c | 207 +++++++++++++++++++++------
> expand.c | 10 +-
> expression.c | 50 +++----
> expression.h | 83 ++++++++++-
> lib.c | 2 +
> lib.h | 1 +
> sparse.1 | 9 ++
> symbol.c | 12 +-
> validation/constexpr-addr-of-static-member.c | 26 ++++
> validation/constexpr-addr-of-static.c | 36 +++++
> validation/constexpr-binop.c | 33 +++++
> validation/constexpr-cast.c | 25 ++++
> validation/constexpr-compound-literal.c | 19 +++
> validation/constexpr-conditional.c | 34 +++++
> validation/constexpr-init.c | 60 ++++++++
> validation/constexpr-labelref.c | 15 ++
> validation/constexpr-offsetof.c | 21 +++
> validation/constexpr-pointer-arith.c | 28 ++++
> validation/constexpr-pointer-cast.c | 13 ++
> validation/constexpr-preop.c | 29 ++++
> validation/constexpr-string.c | 9 ++
> validation/constexpr-types-compatible-p.c | 9 ++
> 22 files changed, 640 insertions(+), 91 deletions(-)
> create mode 100644 validation/constexpr-addr-of-static-member.c
> create mode 100644 validation/constexpr-addr-of-static.c
> create mode 100644 validation/constexpr-binop.c
> create mode 100644 validation/constexpr-cast.c
> create mode 100644 validation/constexpr-compound-literal.c
> create mode 100644 validation/constexpr-conditional.c
> create mode 100644 validation/constexpr-init.c
> create mode 100644 validation/constexpr-labelref.c
> create mode 100644 validation/constexpr-offsetof.c
> create mode 100644 validation/constexpr-pointer-arith.c
> create mode 100644 validation/constexpr-pointer-cast.c
> create mode 100644 validation/constexpr-preop.c
> create mode 100644 validation/constexpr-string.c
> create mode 100644 validation/constexpr-types-compatible-p.c
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-sparse" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
