Hi! If there are _Atomic side-effects in the parameter declarations of non-nested function, when they are parsed, current_function_decl is NULL, the create_artificial_label created labels during build_atomic* are then adjusted by store_parm_decls through set_labels_context_r callback. Unfortunately, if such thing happens in nested function parameter declarations, while those decls are parsed current_function_decl is the parent function (and am not sure it is a good idea to temporarily clear it, some code perhaps should be aware it is in a nested function, or it can refer to variables from the parent function etc.) and that means store_param_decls through set_labels_context_r doesn't adjust anything. As those labels are emitted in the nested function body rather than in the parent, I think it is ok to override the context in those cases.
Bootstrapped/regtested on x86_64-linux and i686-linux, ok for trunk? 2020-04-30 Jakub Jelinek <ja...@redhat.com> PR c/94842 * c-decl.c (set_labels_context_r): In addition to context-less LABEL_DECLs adjust also LABEL_DECLs with context equal to parent function if any. (store_parm_decls): Adjust comment. * gcc.dg/pr94842.c: New test. --- gcc/c/c-decl.c.jj 2020-04-08 11:59:23.726461457 +0200 +++ gcc/c/c-decl.c 2020-04-30 12:19:35.918946543 +0200 @@ -9722,15 +9722,18 @@ store_parm_decls_from (struct c_arg_info store_parm_decls (); } -/* Called by walk_tree to look for and update context-less labels. */ +/* Called by walk_tree to look for and update context-less labels + or labels with context in the parent function. */ static tree set_labels_context_r (tree *tp, int *walk_subtrees, void *data) { + tree ctx = static_cast<tree>(data); if (TREE_CODE (*tp) == LABEL_EXPR - && DECL_CONTEXT (LABEL_EXPR_LABEL (*tp)) == NULL_TREE) + && (DECL_CONTEXT (LABEL_EXPR_LABEL (*tp)) == NULL_TREE + || DECL_CONTEXT (LABEL_EXPR_LABEL (*tp)) == DECL_CONTEXT (ctx))) { - DECL_CONTEXT (LABEL_EXPR_LABEL (*tp)) = static_cast<tree>(data); + DECL_CONTEXT (LABEL_EXPR_LABEL (*tp)) = ctx; *walk_subtrees = 0; } @@ -9800,7 +9803,11 @@ store_parm_decls (void) gotos, labels, etc. Because at that time the function decl for F has not been created yet, those labels do not have any function context. But we have the fndecl now, so update the - labels accordingly. gimplify_expr would crash otherwise. */ + labels accordingly. gimplify_expr would crash otherwise. + Or with nested functions the labels could be created with parent + function's context, while when the statement is emitted at the + start of the nested function, it needs the nested function's + context. */ walk_tree_without_duplicates (&arg_info->pending_sizes, set_labels_context_r, fndecl); add_stmt (arg_info->pending_sizes); --- gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/pr94842.c.jj 2020-04-30 12:25:52.431360645 +0200 +++ gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/pr94842.c 2020-04-30 12:24:47.522323298 +0200 @@ -0,0 +1,11 @@ +/* PR c/94842 */ +/* { dg-do compile } */ +/* { dg-options "" } */ + +_Atomic float x = 5; + +void +foo (void) +{ + void bar (float y[(int) (x += 2)]) {} +} Jakub