From 79c282037d19cfd0c9cb1de06dc019a66c8e0d8b Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Alexandre Oliva Date: Tue, 18 Jul 2000 17:53:35 +0000 Subject: [PATCH] c-decl.c (duplicate_decls): Do not call make_var_volatile() in case of invalid volatile re-declaration. * c-decl.c (duplicate_decls): Do not call make_var_volatile() in case of invalid volatile re-declaration. From-SVN: r35119 --- gcc/ChangeLog | 5 +++++ gcc/c-decl.c | 9 ++++++++- 2 files changed, 13 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/gcc/ChangeLog b/gcc/ChangeLog index b183280c992..a8cd839fd91 100644 --- a/gcc/ChangeLog +++ b/gcc/ChangeLog @@ -1,3 +1,8 @@ +2000-07-18 Alexandre Oliva + + * c-decl.c (duplicate_decls): Do not call make_var_volatile() in + case of invalid volatile re-declaration. + 2000-07-18 Jakub Jelinek * calls.c (store_arg): Return non-zero if sibcall_failure is diff --git a/gcc/c-decl.c b/gcc/c-decl.c index b759fd5e3ae..c2bbb95c5fe 100644 --- a/gcc/c-decl.c +++ b/gcc/c-decl.c @@ -1843,7 +1843,14 @@ duplicate_decls (newdecl, olddecl, different_binding_level) if (TREE_THIS_VOLATILE (newdecl)) { TREE_THIS_VOLATILE (write_olddecl) = 1; - if (TREE_CODE (newdecl) == VAR_DECL) + if (TREE_CODE (newdecl) == VAR_DECL + /* If an automatic variable is re-declared in the same + function scope, but the old declaration was not + volatile, make_var_volatile() would crash because the + variable would have been assigned to a pseudo, not a + MEM. Since this duplicate declaration is invalid + anyway, we just skip the call. */ + && errmsg == 0) make_var_volatile (newdecl); }