public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "jakub at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug tree-optimization/105329] [12/13 Regression] Bogus restrict warning when assigning 1-char string literal to std::string since r12-3347-g8af8abfbbace49e6
Date: Mon, 02 May 2022 13:33:21 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <bug-105329-4-576XmUMeHV@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <bug-105329-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105329

--- Comment #13 from Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
I think this is quite related to the PR98465 discussions.
The warning is on dead code, for basic_string at least when using reasonable
allocators the _M_dataplus._M_p member will always point either into the
_M_local_buf embedded buffer, or to something that has been allocated by the
allocator.  In particular, it should never point into .rodata objects, or when
using a reasonable allocator to global or automatic vars (with the exception of
the embedded buffer).
There is the _M_disjunct method that returns whether the std::string could
overlap with the second argument, if we'd say through some magic attribute on
the   _M_dataplus._M_p were able to tell the optimizers perhaps through a
builtin that there is no overlap, we would optimize away the dead code and be
fine (not just for the questionable warnings, but more importantly for code
generation as well).
Another approach to deal with this exact case might be some builtin that would
find out if the argument must be in read-only memory ("5" in this case) and use
that as an additional check in _M_disjunct, say that then the arg must be
read-only, it must be disjunct because the string is necessarily writable.
As has been discussed, yet another possibility would be to handle the rare case
(not disjunct) in out of line (ideally libstdc++.so.6 contained (at least for
the usual instantiations)) code, which would also make the rare case smaller
and such warnings not really visible to the optimizers.

  parent reply	other threads:[~2022-05-02 13:33 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 32+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2022-04-21  7:41 [Bug c++/105329] New: Bogus restrict warning when assigning 1-char string literal to std::string boris at kolpackov dot net
2022-04-21 11:15 ` [Bug tree-optimization/105329] " rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-04-21 20:50 ` amacleod at redhat dot com
2022-04-21 22:51 ` amacleod at redhat dot com
2022-04-22 10:31 ` aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-04-25 17:50 ` amacleod at redhat dot com
2022-04-25 22:25 ` mattias.ellert at physics dot uu.se
2022-04-26 15:04 ` [Bug tree-optimization/105329] [12 Regression] Bogus restrict warning when assigning 1-char string literal to std::string since r12-3347-g8af8abfbbace49e6 marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-05-02 12:44 ` [Bug tree-optimization/105329] [12/13 " rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-05-02 12:45 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-05-02 12:46 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-05-02 12:57 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-05-02 13:22 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-05-02 13:33 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org [this message]
2022-05-02 13:58 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-05-02 16:04 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-05-02 19:43 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-05-02 22:08 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-05-06  3:59 ` mattias.ellert at physics dot uu.se
2022-05-06  8:33 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-05-20  8:13 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-07-26 12:05 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-09-12  9:37 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-09-29 15:19 ` msebor at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-09-30 16:55 ` dan at stahlke dot org
2022-09-30 17:16 ` dan at stahlke dot org
2023-02-21 18:30 ` 49tbwddbqeazdawz at chyen dot cc
2023-02-21 19:28 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-02-22 17:28 ` 49tbwddbqeazdawz at chyen dot cc
2023-02-22 17:52 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-02-24 14:10 ` wielkiegie at gmail dot com
2023-05-08 12:24 ` [Bug tree-optimization/105329] [12/13/14 " rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org

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=bug-105329-4-576XmUMeHV@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/ \
    --to=gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org \
    --cc=gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.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;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).