Hi!

In my recent rtti.cc change I assumed when emitting the support tinfos
that the tinfos for the fundamental types haven't been created yet.
Normally (in libsupc++.a (fundamental_type_info.o)) that is the case,
but as can be seen on the testcase, one can violate it by using typeid
etc. in the same TU and do it before ~__fundamental_type_info ()
definition.

The following patch fixes that by popping from unemitted_tinfo_decls
only in the normal case when it is there, and treating non-NULL
DECL_INITIAL on a tinfo node as indication that emit_tinfo_decl has
processed it already.

Bootstrapped/regtested on x86_64-linux and i686-linux, ok for trunk?

2023-03-07  Jakub Jelinek  <ja...@redhat.com>

        PR c++/109042
        * rtti.cc (emit_support_tinfo_1): Don't assert that last
        unemitted_tinfo_decls element is tinfo, instead pop from it only in
        that case.
        * decl2.cc (c_parse_final_cleanups): Don't call emit_tinfo_decl
        for unemitted_tinfO_decls which have already non-NULL DECL_INITIAL.

        * g++.dg/rtti/pr109042.C: New test.

--- gcc/cp/rtti.cc.jj   2023-03-03 00:34:52.028567946 +0100
+++ gcc/cp/rtti.cc      2023-03-06 19:06:27.433307136 +0100
@@ -1581,10 +1581,10 @@ emit_support_tinfo_1 (tree bltn)
       /* Emit it right away if not emitted already.  */
       if (DECL_INITIAL (tinfo) == NULL_TREE)
        {
-         gcc_assert (unemitted_tinfo_decls->last () == tinfo);
          bool ok = emit_tinfo_decl (tinfo);
          gcc_assert (ok);
-         unemitted_tinfo_decls->pop ();
+         if (unemitted_tinfo_decls->last () == tinfo)
+           unemitted_tinfo_decls->pop ();
        }
     }
 }
--- gcc/cp/decl2.cc.jj  2023-01-18 16:11:47.053213397 +0100
+++ gcc/cp/decl2.cc     2023-03-06 19:07:16.830582984 +0100
@@ -4982,7 +4982,7 @@ c_parse_final_cleanups (void)
         get emitted.  */
       for (i = unemitted_tinfo_decls->length ();
           unemitted_tinfo_decls->iterate (--i, &t);)
-       if (emit_tinfo_decl (t))
+       if (DECL_INITIAL (t) || emit_tinfo_decl (t))
          {
            reconsider = true;
            unemitted_tinfo_decls->unordered_remove (i);
--- gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/rtti/pr109042.C.jj     2023-03-06 19:11:06.995208812 
+0100
+++ gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/rtti/pr109042.C        2023-03-06 19:10:59.117324298 
+0100
@@ -0,0 +1,20 @@
+// PR c++/109042
+// { dg-do compile }
+
+namespace std { class type_info {}; }
+
+std::type_info
+foo ()
+{
+  return typeid (void);
+}
+
+namespace __cxxabiv1 {
+  struct __fundamental_type_info {
+    virtual ~__fundamental_type_info ();
+  };
+
+  __fundamental_type_info::~__fundamental_type_info ()
+  {
+  }
+}

        Jakub

Reply via email to