public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* [Bug c/43798] New: attribute((aligned(x))) not honored for array element types? @ 2010-04-19 12:59 rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-19 13:05 ` [Bug c/43798] " rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org ` (3 more replies) 0 siblings, 4 replies; 5+ messages in thread From: rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2010-04-19 12:59 UTC (permalink / raw) To: gcc-bugs in libbid we have typedef __attribute__((aligned(16))) struct { unsigned long long w[3]; } UINT192; UINT192 bid_Kx192[32]; thus we request 16-byte alignment for UINT192 (whose elements add up to a size of 24). Now the array ends up with elements of size 24 and thus the elements are _not_ aligned to a 16-byte boundary, still the element type is not adjusted to reflect that leading to inconsistencies when one for example tries to set operand 3 of an ARRAY_REF (which is specified in units of the alignment of the element). This causes PR43783. This is also at least a documentation bug as I can't find anything that documents the above behavior. -- Summary: attribute((aligned(x))) not honored for array element types? Product: gcc Version: 4.6.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywords: wrong-code, documentation Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: c AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org ReportedBy: rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43798 ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* [Bug c/43798] attribute((aligned(x))) not honored for array element types? 2010-04-19 12:59 [Bug c/43798] New: attribute((aligned(x))) not honored for array element types? rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2010-04-19 13:05 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-19 13:28 ` schwab at linux-m68k dot org ` (2 subsequent siblings) 3 siblings, 0 replies; 5+ messages in thread From: rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2010-04-19 13:05 UTC (permalink / raw) To: gcc-bugs ------- Comment #1 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-19 13:05 ------- Namely the bid_Kx192 decl looks like <var_decl 0x7ffff5af8000 bid_Kx192 type <array_type 0x7ffff5add7e0 type <record_type 0x7ffff5add690 UINT192 type_0 BLK size <integer_cst 0x7ffff7ef70c8 constant 192> unit size <integer_cst 0x7ffff7ef7078 constant 24> user align 128 symtab 0 alias set -1 canonical type 0x7ffff5add498 fields <field_decl 0x7ffff7fb34c0 w> context <translation_unit_decl 0x7ffff5afe000 D.1631> pointer_to_this <pointer_type 0x7ffff5add888>> BLK size <integer_cst 0x7ffff7ef7258 constant 6144> unit size <integer_cst 0x7ffff7fcfaa0 constant 768> user align 128 symtab 0 alias set -1 canonical type 0x7ffff5add9d8 domain <integer_type 0x7ffff5add738> pointer_to_this <pointer_type 0x7ffff5afc000>> addressable used public static common BLK file t.c line 6 col 9 size <integer_cst 0x7ffff7ef7258 6144> unit size <integer_cst 0x7ffff7fcfaa0 768> align 256 chain <function_decl 0x7ffff5adcb00 main>> where the TYPE_ALIGN of the element type only applies to the first array element. If you look at expr.c:array_ref_element_size then you can see that there doesn't exist a valid TREE_OPERAND (array-ref, 3) for indexing the above array as its TYPE_ALIGN_UNIT is bigger than the aligned-size. IMHO the C frontend ought to generate a variant type for the element type that has its alignment adjusted (or it shall follow the users request and add padding between the elements?). The current situation is unfortunate for the middle-end. -- rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |jsm28 at gcc dot gnu dot org http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43798 ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* [Bug c/43798] attribute((aligned(x))) not honored for array element types? 2010-04-19 12:59 [Bug c/43798] New: attribute((aligned(x))) not honored for array element types? rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-19 13:05 ` [Bug c/43798] " rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2010-04-19 13:28 ` schwab at linux-m68k dot org 2010-04-19 13:44 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-19 13:57 ` rguenther at suse dot de 3 siblings, 0 replies; 5+ messages in thread From: schwab at linux-m68k dot org @ 2010-04-19 13:28 UTC (permalink / raw) To: gcc-bugs ------- Comment #2 from schwab at linux-m68k dot org 2010-04-19 13:28 ------- An array cannot have internal padding, so the padding needs to be added to the element type. The attempt to define such an array should probably be rejected. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43798 ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* [Bug c/43798] attribute((aligned(x))) not honored for array element types? 2010-04-19 12:59 [Bug c/43798] New: attribute((aligned(x))) not honored for array element types? rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-19 13:05 ` [Bug c/43798] " rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-19 13:28 ` schwab at linux-m68k dot org @ 2010-04-19 13:44 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-19 13:57 ` rguenther at suse dot de 3 siblings, 0 replies; 5+ messages in thread From: jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2010-04-19 13:44 UTC (permalink / raw) To: gcc-bugs ------- Comment #3 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-19 13:44 ------- At least with pointers alignment greater than size of the pointed to type (or not divisible by it) is often used to say that the start of the array is aligned some way. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43798 ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* [Bug c/43798] attribute((aligned(x))) not honored for array element types? 2010-04-19 12:59 [Bug c/43798] New: attribute((aligned(x))) not honored for array element types? rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org ` (2 preceding siblings ...) 2010-04-19 13:44 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2010-04-19 13:57 ` rguenther at suse dot de 3 siblings, 0 replies; 5+ messages in thread From: rguenther at suse dot de @ 2010-04-19 13:57 UTC (permalink / raw) To: gcc-bugs ------- Comment #4 from rguenther at suse dot de 2010-04-19 13:57 ------- Subject: Re: attribute((aligned(x))) not honored for array element types? On Mon, 19 Apr 2010, jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote: > ------- Comment #3 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-19 13:44 ------- > At least with pointers alignment greater than size of the pointed to type (or > not divisible by it) is often used to say that the start of the array is > aligned some way. Yes, we correctly copy the (over-)alignment of the element type to the array type. But the element type alignment then stays "wrong". Richard. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43798 ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2010-04-19 13:57 UTC | newest] Thread overview: 5+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed) -- links below jump to the message on this page -- 2010-04-19 12:59 [Bug c/43798] New: attribute((aligned(x))) not honored for array element types? rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-19 13:05 ` [Bug c/43798] " rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-19 13:28 ` schwab at linux-m68k dot org 2010-04-19 13:44 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-19 13:57 ` rguenther at suse dot de
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox; as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).