Tested x86_64-pc-linux-gnu. Does this make sense? Did you have another theory
about how to merge these?
-- 8< --
Doing a dynamic_cast in both TUs broke because we were declaring a new
__class_type_info in _b that conflicted with the one imported in the global
module from _a. lookup_elaborated_type has a comment that we probably don't
want to find such imports in general, but in this case it seems necessary to
make the artificial lazy declarations of RTTI types work.
gcc/cp/ChangeLog:
* name-lookup.cc (lookup_elaborated_type): Look for bindings
in the global namespace in the ABI namespace.
gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog:
* g++.dg/modules/pr106304_b.C: Add dynamic_cast.
---
gcc/cp/name-lookup.cc | 10 ++++++++++
gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/modules/pr106304_b.C | 1 +
2 files changed, 11 insertions(+)
diff --git a/gcc/cp/name-lookup.cc b/gcc/cp/name-lookup.cc
index 09dc6ef3e5a..f15b338025d 100644
--- a/gcc/cp/name-lookup.cc
+++ b/gcc/cp/name-lookup.cc
@@ -8092,6 +8092,16 @@ lookup_elaborated_type (tree name, TAG_how how)
// FIXME: This isn't quite right, if we find something
// here, from the language PoV we're not supposed to
// know it?
+ // We at least need to do this in __cxxabiv1 to unify lazy
+ // declarations of __class_type_info in build_dynamic_cast_1.
+ if (current_namespace == abi_node)
+ {
+ tree g = (BINDING_VECTOR_CLUSTER (*slot, 0)
+ .slots[BINDING_SLOT_GLOBAL]);
+ for (ovl_iterator iter (g); iter; ++iter)
+ if (qualify_lookup (*iter, LOOK_want::TYPE))
+ return *iter;
+ }
}
}
}
diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/modules/pr106304_b.C
b/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/modules/pr106304_b.C
index e8333909c8d..0d1da086176 100644
--- a/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/modules/pr106304_b.C
+++ b/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/modules/pr106304_b.C
@@ -5,4 +5,5 @@ module pr106304;
void f(A& a) {
as_b(a);
+ dynamic_cast<B*>(&a);
}
base-commit: 5347263b347d02e875879ca40ca6e289ac178919
prerequisite-patch-id: 66735c0c7beb22586ed4b632d10ec9094bb9920c
--
2.39.3
