[Bug c/97548] [11 Regression] bogus -Wvla-parameter on a bound expression involving a parameter

[msebor at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97548

Martin Sebor  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
 Resolution|--- |FIXED

--- Comment #9 from Martin Sebor  ---
Fixed.

[Bug c/97548] [11 Regression] bogus -Wvla-parameter on a bound expression involving a parameter

[cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97548

--- Comment #8 from CVS Commits  ---
The releases/gcc-11 branch has been updated by Martin Sebor
:

https://gcc.gnu.org/g:7d3f53c595e1766ca0494e5f56f33b0ce49b3bb4

commit r11-9396-g7d3f53c595e1766ca0494e5f56f33b0ce49b3bb4
Author: Martin Sebor 
Date:   Thu Jul 15 10:11:23 2021 -0600

Avoid -Wvla-parameter for nontrivial bounds [PR97548].

Resolves:
PR c/101289 - bogus -Wvla-paramater warning when using const for vla param
PR c/97548 -  bogus -Wvla-parameter on a bound expression involving a
parameter

gcc/c-family/ChangeLog:

PR c/101289
PR c/97548
* c-warn.c (warn_parm_array_mismatch): Use OEP_DECL_NAME.

gcc/c/ChangeLog:

PR c/101289
PR c/97548
* c-decl.c (get_parm_array_spec): Strip nops.

gcc/ChangeLog:

PR c/101289
PR c/97548
* fold-const.c (operand_compare::operand_equal_p): Handle
OEP_DECL_NAME.
(operand_compare::verify_hash_value): Same.
* tree-core.h (OEP_DECL_NAME): New.

gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog:

* gcc.dg/Wvla-parameter-12.c: New test.

[Bug c/97548] [11 Regression] bogus -Wvla-parameter on a bound expression involving a parameter

[rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97548

Richard Biener  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Target Milestone|11.2|11.3

--- Comment #7 from Richard Biener  ---
GCC 11.2 is being released, retargeting bugs to GCC 11.3

[Bug c/97548] [11 Regression] bogus -Wvla-parameter on a bound expression involving a parameter

[msebor at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97548

--- Comment #6 from Martin Sebor  ---
The fix isn't very robust since it only handles redeclarations with VLA
parameters that involve bounds that have the same name but not nontrivial
expressions involving different names, like in this case:

$ cat pr97548-c6.c && gcc -S -Wall pr97548-c6.c
void g (int k, int [k + 1]);
void g (int m, int [m + 1]) { }   // bogus warning
pr97548-c6.c:2:16: warning: argument 2 of type ‘int[m + 1]’ declared with
mismatched bound ‘m + 1’ [-Wvla-parameter]
2 | void g (int m, int [m + 1]) { }   // bogus warning
  |^~~
pr97548-c6.c:1:16: note: previously declared as ‘int[k + 1]’ with bound ‘k + 1’
1 | void g (int k, int [k + 1]);
  |^~~

[Bug c/97548] [11 Regression] bogus -Wvla-parameter on a bound expression involving a parameter

[msebor at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97548

Martin Sebor  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

Summary|bogus -Wvla-parameter on a  |[11 Regression] bogus
   |bound expression involving  |-Wvla-parameter on a bound
   |a parameter |expression involving a
   ||parameter

--- Comment #5 from Martin Sebor  ---
GCC 10 doesn't warn (it doesn't provide -Wvla-parameter) so it's a regression.