On Wed, Apr 30, 2014 at 11:22 PM, Reid Kleckner <[email protected]> wrote:
> Thanks!
>
> ================
> Comment at: lib/Sema/SemaDeclAttr.cpp:3700-3717
> @@ -3699,1 +3699,20 @@
>
> +static void handleDeclspecThreadAttr(Sema &S, Decl *D,
> + const AttributeList &Attr) {
> + VarDecl *VD = cast<VarDecl>(D);
> + if (!S.Context.getTargetInfo().isTLSSupported()) {
> + S.Diag(Attr.getLoc(), diag::err_thread_unsupported);
> + return;
> + }
> + if (VD->getTSCSpec() != TSCS_unspecified) {
> + S.Diag(Attr.getLoc(), diag::err_declspec_thread_on_thread_variable);
> + return;
> + }
> + if (VD->hasLocalStorage()) {
> + S.Diag(Attr.getLoc(), diag::err_thread_non_global) <<
> "__declspec(thread)";
> + return;
> + }
> + VD->addAttr(::new (S.Context) ThreadAttr(
> + Attr.getRange(), S.Context, Attr.getAttributeSpellingListIndex()));
> +}
> +
> ----------------
> Richard Smith wrote:
>> Are you allowed to specify `__declspec(thread)` multiple times on the same
>> declaration? This would appear to allow that.
> MSVC allows it with a warning, and we accept silently. The same is true for
> all of our other __declspec attributes. If we want to issue a warning, IMO
> we should do it somewhere common where we can use the same diagnostic
> reporting.
Definitely agreed.
>
> ================
> Comment at: lib/Sema/SemaDeclAttr.cpp:3711-3714
> @@ +3710,6 @@
> + }
> + if (VD->hasLocalStorage()) {
> + S.Diag(Attr.getLoc(), diag::err_thread_non_global) <<
> "__declspec(thread)";
> + return;
> + }
> + VD->addAttr(::new (S.Context) ThreadAttr(
> ----------------
> Richard Smith wrote:
>> Can you move the `hasLocalStorage` check into the common attribute subject
>> checking side of things? That'd be more in line with what we do elsewhere,
>> but might make the diagnostic less consistent with other thread specifiers,
>> so I'm on the fence.
> We don't currently have anything like a GlobalVariable subject but maybe we
> should.
Yes we do:
def GlobalVar : SubsetSubject<Var,
[{S->hasGlobalStorage()}]>;
> I'd rather not tablegen this for now. Now that I'm looking at the code
> tablegen is making for us, I feel like we should try to optimize its code
> size a bit.
I agree; if I get the chance, I was intending to look into cleaning it
up a bit. But if you would like to take a crack at it, I have no
objections. :-)
~Aaron
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
