We now catch this error at IR generation time; previously we'd send it
to the driver (where it would fail to compile).
Change-Id: I45890214ffa164be1c0f359320f942bc4dc479ca
Bug: skia:11265
Reviewed-on: https://skia-review.googlesource.com/c/skia/+/365697
Reviewed-by: Brian Osman <brianosman@google.com>
Commit-Queue: Brian Osman <brianosman@google.com>
Auto-Submit: John Stiles <johnstiles@google.com>
Pre-cleanup as I start looking at how structs are parsed and handled in
the IR.
Bug: skia:11228
Change-Id: I6334d1073211cbbdf69ddffa8df420c45fd59fcc
Reviewed-on: https://skia-review.googlesource.com/c/skia/+/361059
Commit-Queue: Brian Osman <brianosman@google.com>
Reviewed-by: John Stiles <johnstiles@google.com>
In GLSL and SkSL, control statements don't require explicit braces
around single-statement children. That is, the `match = true` child
statement here doesn't need to be braced.
if (condition) match = true;
Because there are no braces, we never create a Block or a dedicated
SymbolTable here. This is normally not a problem, but the fuzzer
discovered that it can dump things into the symbol table inside a child
statement:
if (condition) int newSymbol;
This becomes problematic because the symbol name now outlives its block.
This means `newSymbol` can be referred to later, which should be illegal
(and can cause the optimizer to blow up since the structure is bogus).
There doesn't seem to be any reason to allow this code to compile; the
user can add an explicit scope here to make it reasonable, and it's
(almost) meaningless to declare a symbol that's instantly going to fall
out of scope. This code is now rejected with an error message.
Change-Id: I44778e5b59652d345b10eecd4c88efbf7d86a5e0
Bug: oss-fuzz:29849
Reviewed-on: https://skia-review.googlesource.com/c/skia/+/358960
Reviewed-by: Ethan Nicholas <ethannicholas@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Brian Osman <brianosman@google.com>
Auto-Submit: John Stiles <johnstiles@google.com>
The previous change caused varDeclarations() to sometimes return an
expression-statement. This only made sense in the context of being
called from Parser::statement(). Other places which called
varDeclarations() expect vardecls and nothing else.
Change-Id: I562657cadfa20dcd77b527f2dc43dca0c6bf389f
Bug: oss-fuzz:29845
Reviewed-on: https://skia-review.googlesource.com/c/skia/+/358528
Reviewed-by: Ethan Nicholas <ethannicholas@google.com>
Commit-Queue: John Stiles <johnstiles@google.com>
Auto-Submit: John Stiles <johnstiles@google.com>
This will allow us to load these inputs for unit testing in `dm`.
Change-Id: Id256ba7c30d3ec94b98048e47af44cf9efe580d5
Bug: skia:11009
Reviewed-on: https://skia-review.googlesource.com/c/skia/+/357282
Commit-Queue: John Stiles <johnstiles@google.com>
Auto-Submit: John Stiles <johnstiles@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Brian Osman <brianosman@google.com>
