Re: [patch] Fix unused static symbols so they're not dropped by clang

[David Blaikie <dblaikie at gmail dot com>]

On Fri, Apr 11, 2014 at 9:00 PM, Andrew Pinski <pinskia@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 11, 2014 at 1:17 PM, David Blaikie <dblaikie@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Fri, Apr 11, 2014 at 11:23 AM, Doug Evans <dje@google.com> wrote:
>>> On Thu, Apr 10, 2014 at 11:51 PM, David Blaikie <dblaikie@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> Several tests used file-static functions and variables that were not
>>>> referenced by the code. Even at -O0, clang omits these entities at the
>>>> frontend so the tests fail.
>>>>
>>>> Since it doesn't look like these tests needed this functionality for
>>>> what they were testing, I've modified the variables/functions to
>>>> either be non-static, or marked them with __attribute__((used)).
>>>>
>>>> If it's preferred that I use the attribute more pervasively, rather
>>>> than just making the entities non-static, I can provide a patch for
>>>> that (or some other preferred solution). There's certainly precedent
>>>> for both (non-static entities and __attribute__((used)) in the
>>>> testsuite already and much more of the former than the latter).
>>>>
>>>> I have commit-after-review access, so just looking for sign-off here.
>>>
>>> Yikes.
>>>
>>> This is becoming more and more painful (not your fault of course!).
>>> I can imagine this being a never ending source of regressions.
>>>
>>> Does clang perchance have a -O0-and-yes-I-really-mean-O0 option?
>>
>> Sort of. It does have -femit-all-decls, which, though poorly named,
>> causes clang to produce definitions for unused static entities and
>> even unused inline functions (which GCC doesn't do).
>
> By default GCC does not keep unused inline functions but there is an
> option for that -fkeep-inline-functions.

Ah, good to know.

My point was that the GDB test suite passes without enabling that flag
for GCC and I think that's somewhat akin to having the suite passable
without having to add -femit-all-decls for Clang. I realize, of
course, that most GDB developers won't be running the test suite with
Clang, but I'm happy to contribute patches when this comes up from
time to time. It's certainly not a pervasive habit across the test
suite to keep everything static - just this handful of tests happen to
do it.

But I'm open to whatever you folks think is the best approach - if
that means Clang only passes the suite when passing particular flags,
so be it. Perhaps there'd be a way we could build that knowledge into
the testsuite itself so that GDB developers who want to use Clang
don't have to duplicate those details locally.

- David