public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Masahiro Yamada <masahiroy@kernel.org>
To: linux-kbuild@vger.kernel.org
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Masahiro Yamada <masahiroy@kernel.org>
Subject: [PATCH 05/17] genksyms: fix last 3 shift/reduce conflicts
Date: Tue, 14 Jan 2025 00:00:43 +0900	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20250113150253.3097820-6-masahiroy@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20250113150253.3097820-1-masahiroy@kernel.org>

The genksyms parser has ambiguities in its grammar, which are currently
suppressed by a workaround in scripts/genksyms/Makefile.

Building genksyms with W=1 generates the following warnings:

    YACC    scripts/genksyms/parse.tab.[ch]
  scripts/genksyms/parse.y: warning: 3 shift/reduce conflicts [-Wconflicts-sr]
  scripts/genksyms/parse.y: note: rerun with option '-Wcounterexamples' to generate conflict counterexamples

The ambiguity arises when decl_specifier_seq is followed by '(' because
the following two interpretations are possible:

  - decl_specifier_seq direct_abstract_declarator '(' parameter_declaration_clause ')'
  - decl_specifier_seq '(' abstract_declarator ')'

This issue occurs because the current parser allows an empty string to
be reduced to direct_abstract_declarator, which is incorrect.

K&R [1] explains the correct grammar:

    <parameter-declaration> ::= {<declaration-specifier>}+ <declarator>
                              | {<declaration-specifier>}+ <abstract-declarator>
                              | {<declaration-specifier>}+

    <abstract-declarator> ::= <pointer>
                            | <pointer> <direct-abstract-declarator>
                            | <direct-abstract-declarator>

    <direct-abstract-declarator> ::=  ( <abstract-declarator> )
                                   | {<direct-abstract-declarator>}? [ {<constant-expression>}? ]
                                   | {<direct-abstract-declarator>}? ( {<parameter-type-list>}? )

We need to consider the difference between the following two examples:

[Example 1] ( <abstract-declarator> ) can become <direct-abstract-declarator>

        void my_func(int (foo));

    ... is equivalent to:

        void my_func(int foo);

[Example 2] ( <parameter-type-list> ) can become <direct-abstract-declarator>

        typedef int foo;
        void my_func(int (foo));

    ... is equivalent to:

        void my_func(int (*callback)(int));

Please note that the function declaration is identical in both examples,
but the preceding typedef creates the distinction. I introduced a new
term, open_paren, to enable the type lookup immediately after the '('
token. Without this, we cannot distinguish between [Example 1] and
[Example 2].

With this commit, all conflicts are resolved.

[1]: https://cs.wmich.edu/~gupta/teaching/cs4850/sumII06/The%20syntax%20of%20C%20in%20Backus-Naur%20form.htm

Signed-off-by: Masahiro Yamada <masahiroy@kernel.org>
---

 scripts/genksyms/parse.y | 28 ++++++++++++++++++++--------
 1 file changed, 20 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)

diff --git a/scripts/genksyms/parse.y b/scripts/genksyms/parse.y
index dc575d467bbf..fafce939c32f 100644
--- a/scripts/genksyms/parse.y
+++ b/scripts/genksyms/parse.y
@@ -363,35 +363,47 @@ parameter_declaration_list:
 	;
 
 parameter_declaration:
-	decl_specifier_seq abstract_declarator
+	decl_specifier_seq abstract_declarator_opt
 		{ $$ = $2 ? $2 : $1; }
 	;
 
+abstract_declarator_opt:
+	/* empty */				{ $$ = NULL; }
+	| abstract_declarator
+	;
+
 abstract_declarator:
-	ptr_operator abstract_declarator
+	ptr_operator
+	| ptr_operator abstract_declarator
 		{ $$ = $2 ? $2 : $1; }
 	| direct_abstract_declarator
 		{ $$ = $1; dont_want_type_specifier = false; }
 	;
 
 direct_abstract_declarator:
-	/* empty */					{ $$ = NULL; }
-	| IDENT
+	  IDENT
 		{ /* For version 2 checksums, we don't want to remember
 		     private parameter names.  */
 		  remove_node($1);
 		  $$ = $1;
 		}
-	| direct_abstract_declarator '(' parameter_declaration_clause ')'
+	| direct_abstract_declarator open_paren parameter_declaration_clause ')'
 		{ $$ = $4; }
-	| direct_abstract_declarator '(' error ')'
+	| direct_abstract_declarator open_paren error ')'
 		{ $$ = $4; }
 	| direct_abstract_declarator BRACKET_PHRASE
 		{ $$ = $2; }
-	| '(' abstract_declarator ')'
+	| open_paren parameter_declaration_clause ')'
 		{ $$ = $3; }
-	| '(' error ')'
+	| open_paren abstract_declarator ')'
 		{ $$ = $3; }
+	| open_paren error ')'
+		{ $$ = $3; }
+	| BRACKET_PHRASE
+	;
+
+open_paren:
+	'('	{ $$ = $1; dont_want_type_specifier = false; }
 	;
 
 function_definition:
-- 
2.43.0


  parent reply	other threads:[~2025-01-13 15:03 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2025-01-13 15:00 [PATCH 00/17] genksyms: fix conflicts and syntax errors in parser Masahiro Yamada
2025-01-13 15:00 ` [PATCH 01/17] genksyms: rename m_abstract_declarator to abstract_declarator Masahiro Yamada
2025-01-13 15:00 ` [PATCH 02/17] genksyms: rename cvar_qualifier to type_qualifier Masahiro Yamada
2025-01-13 15:00 ` [PATCH 03/17] genksyms: reduce type_qualifier directly to decl_specifier Masahiro Yamada
2025-01-13 15:00 ` [PATCH 04/17] genksyms: fix 6 shift/reduce conflicts and 5 reduce/reduce conflicts Masahiro Yamada
2025-01-14  1:23   ` Masahiro Yamada
2025-01-13 15:00 ` Masahiro Yamada [this message]
2025-01-13 15:00 ` [PATCH 06/17] genksyms: remove Makefile hack Masahiro Yamada
2025-01-13 15:00 ` [PATCH 07/17] genksyms: restrict direct-abstract-declarator to take one parameter-type-list Masahiro Yamada
2025-01-13 15:00 ` [PATCH 08/17] genksyms: restrict direct-declarator " Masahiro Yamada
2025-01-13 15:00 ` [PATCH 09/17] genksyms: record attributes consistently for init-declarator Masahiro Yamada
2025-01-13 15:00 ` [PATCH 10/17] genksyms: decouple ATTRIBUTE_PHRASE from type-qualifier Masahiro Yamada
2025-01-13 15:00 ` [PATCH 11/17] genksyms: fix syntax error for attribute before abstract_declarator Masahiro Yamada
2025-01-13 15:00 ` [PATCH 12/17] genksyms: fix syntax error for attribute before nested_declarator Masahiro Yamada
2025-01-13 15:00 ` [PATCH 13/17] genksyms: fix syntax error for attribute after abstact_declarator Masahiro Yamada
2025-01-13 15:00 ` [PATCH 14/17] genksyms: fix syntax error for attribute after 'struct' Masahiro Yamada
2025-01-13 15:00 ` [PATCH 15/17] genksyms: fix syntax error for attribute after 'union' Masahiro Yamada
2025-01-13 15:00 ` [PATCH 16/17] genksyms: fix syntax error for builtin (u)int*x*_t types Masahiro Yamada
2025-01-13 15:00 ` [PATCH 17/17] genksyms: fix syntax error for attribute before init-declarator Masahiro Yamada
2025-01-14 20:33 ` [PATCH 00/17] genksyms: fix conflicts and syntax errors in parser Nicolas Schier

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20250113150253.3097820-6-masahiroy@kernel.org \
    --to=masahiroy@kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kbuild@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox