From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Daniel Gustafsson <daniel@yesql.se>
cc: pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org
Subject: Re: jsonapi: scary new warnings with LTO enabled
In-reply-to: <DCD56158-A642-4954-87FF-9DAD5425F3FF@yesql.se>
References: <2074634.1744839761@sss.pgh.pa.us> <0A3CF5C4-9947-42E3-89A9-34FCF7BA95BA@yesql.se> <2078511.1744841564@sss.pgh.pa.us> <DCD56158-A642-4954-87FF-9DAD5425F3FF@yesql.se>
Comments: In-reply-to Daniel Gustafsson <daniel@yesql.se>
	message dated "Thu, 17 Apr 2025 00:18:23 +0200"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-ID: <2084686.1744844690.1@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Date: Wed, 16 Apr 2025 19:04:50 -0400
Message-ID: <2084687.1744844690@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Archived-At: <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/2084687.1744844690%40sss.pgh.pa.us>
Precedence: bulk

Daniel Gustafsson <daniel@yesql.se> writes:
> On 17 Apr 2025, at 00:12, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>> The only alternative I can see that might stop the warning is if we
>> can find a way to make it clearer to the optimizer that the FREE()
>> isn't reached.  But I'm not sure about a trustworthy way to make that
>> happen.

> Yeah, that seems messy enough that someone down the line will go "why on=
 earth"
> and we'll have to revisit this discussion.  It can probably be made to w=
ork but
> I doubt it will be worth it compared to allocating on the heap.

Looking through all of the callers of freeJsonLexContext, quite
a lot of them use local JsonLexContext structs, and probably some
of them are more performance-critical than these.  So that raises
the question of why are we seeing warnings for only these call
sites?  Maybe there is a more elegant way to suppress them.

Still, I think that observation refutes my initial thought that
we should rip out support for local JsonLexContext structs
altogether.  I'm inclined now to just do the minimal thing of
changing these callers to use an allocated struct, and call it
a day.  (BTW, there seem to be only 2 places to change not 3;
two of the warnings are pointing at the same variable.)

			regards, tom lane