'#pragma pack (pop)' and suspicious uses of '#pragma pack' in included files
The second recommit (r309106) was reverted because the "non-default #pragma
pack value chages the alignment of struct or union members in the included file"
warning proved to be too aggressive for external projects like Chromium
(https://bugs.chromium.org/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=749197). This recommit
makes the problematic warning a non-default one, and gives it the
-Wpragma-pack-suspicious-include warning option.
The first recommit (r308441) caused a "non-default #pragma pack value might
change the alignment of struct or union members in the included file" warning
in LLVM itself. This recommit tweaks the added warning to avoid warnings for
#includes that don't have any records that are affected by the non-default
alignment. This tweak avoids the previously emitted warning in LLVM.
Original message:
This commit adds a new -Wpragma-pack warning. It warns in the following cases:
- When a translation unit is missing terminating #pragma pack (pop) directives.
- When entering an included file if the current alignment value as determined
by '#pragma pack' directives is different from the default alignment value.
- When leaving an included file that changed the state of the current alignment
value.
rdar://10184173
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D35484
llvm-svn: 309386
The warning fires on non-suspicious code in Chromium. Reverting until a
solution is figured out.
> Recommit r308327 2nd time: Add a warning for missing
> '#pragma pack (pop)' and suspicious uses of '#pragma pack' in included files
>
> The first recommit (r308441) caused a "non-default #pragma pack value might
> change the alignment of struct or union members in the included file" warning
> in LLVM itself. This recommit tweaks the added warning to avoid warnings for
> #includes that don't have any records that are affected by the non-default
> alignment. This tweak avoids the previously emitted warning in LLVM.
>
> Original message:
>
> This commit adds a new -Wpragma-pack warning. It warns in the following cases:
>
> - When a translation unit is missing terminating #pragma pack (pop) directives.
> - When entering an included file if the current alignment value as determined
> by '#pragma pack' directives is different from the default alignment value.
> - When leaving an included file that changed the state of the current alignment
> value.
>
> rdar://10184173
>
> Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D35484
llvm-svn: 309186
'#pragma pack (pop)' and suspicious uses of '#pragma pack' in included files
The first recommit (r308441) caused a "non-default #pragma pack value might
change the alignment of struct or union members in the included file" warning
in LLVM itself. This recommit tweaks the added warning to avoid warnings for
#includes that don't have any records that are affected by the non-default
alignment. This tweak avoids the previously emitted warning in LLVM.
Original message:
This commit adds a new -Wpragma-pack warning. It warns in the following cases:
- When a translation unit is missing terminating #pragma pack (pop) directives.
- When entering an included file if the current alignment value as determined
by '#pragma pack' directives is different from the default alignment value.
- When leaving an included file that changed the state of the current alignment
value.
rdar://10184173
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D35484
llvm-svn: 309106
This seems to have broken the sanitizer-x86_64-linux buildbot. Reverting until
it's fixed, especially since this landed just before the 5.0 branch.
> This commit adds a new -Wpragma-pack warning. It warns in the following cases:
>
> - When a translation unit is missing terminating #pragma pack (pop) directives.
> - When entering an included file if the current alignment value as determined
> by '#pragma pack' directives is different from the default alignment value.
> - When leaving an included file that changed the state of the current alignment
> value.
>
> rdar://10184173
>
> Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D35484
llvm-svn: 308455
and suspicious uses of '#pragma pack' in included files
This commit adds a new -Wpragma-pack warning. It warns in the following cases:
- When a translation unit is missing terminating #pragma pack (pop) directives.
- When entering an included file if the current alignment value as determined
by '#pragma pack' directives is different from the default alignment value.
- When leaving an included file that changed the state of the current alignment
value.
rdar://10184173
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D35484
llvm-svn: 308441
of '#pragma pack' in included files
This commit adds a new -Wpragma-pack warning. It warns in the following cases:
- When a translation unit is missing terminating #pragma pack (pop) directives.
- When entering an included file if the current alignment value as determined
by '#pragma pack' directives is different from the default alignment value.
- When leaving an included file that changed the state of the current alignment
value.
rdar://10184173
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D35484
llvm-svn: 308327
Support certain MS pragmas right after the closing curly brace of a
class. Clang did not expect __pragma in this position.
This fixes PR28094.
llvm-svn: 272628
- This is designed to make it obvious that %clang_cc1 is a "test variable"
which is substituted. It is '%clang_cc1' instead of '%clang -cc1' because it
can be useful to redefine what gets run as 'clang -cc1' (for example, to set
a default target).
llvm-svn: 91446
with implicit quotes around them. This has a bunch of follow-on
effects and requires tweaking to a whole lot of code. This causes
a regression in two tests (xfailed) by causing it to emit things like:
Line 10: duplicate interface declaration for category 'MyClass1' ('Category1')
instead of:
Line 10: duplicate interface declaration for category 'MyClass1(Category1)'
I will fix this in a follow-up commit.
As part of this, I had to start switching stuff to use ->getDeclName() instead
of Decl::getName() for consistency. This is good, but I was planning to do this
as an independent patch. There will be several follow-on patches
to clean up some of the mess, but this patch is already too big.
llvm-svn: 59917
Alex Lorenz