* [Bug tree-optimization/106868] [12/13 Regression] Bogus -Wdangling-pointer warning with -O1
2022-09-07 8:47 [Bug c/106868] New: Bogus -Wdangling-pointer warning with -O1 medhefgo at web dot de
@ 2022-09-07 9:05 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-09-12 16:18 ` msebor at gcc dot gnu.org
` (6 subsequent siblings)
7 siblings, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2022-09-07 9:05 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106868
Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Keywords| |diagnostic
Summary|Bogus -Wdangling-pointer |[12/13 Regression] Bogus
|warning with -O1 |-Wdangling-pointer warning
| |with -O1
Component|c |tree-optimization
Last reconfirmed| |2022-09-07
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Priority|P3 |P2
CC| |msebor at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone|--- |12.3
--- Comment #1 from Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Confirmed.
<bb 2> [local count: 1073741824]:
alloc (&q);
q.0_1 = q;
*p_4(D) = q.0_1;
q ={v} {CLOBBER(eol)};
a_8 = __builtin_memcpy (q.0_1, "", 1);
*a_8 = 0;
return;
(gdb) p debug_gimple_stmt (use_stmt)
# .MEM_9 = VDEF <.MEM_7>
*a_8 = 0;
(gdb) p debug_gimple_stmt (stmt)
# .MEM_6 = VDEF <.MEM_5>
q ={v} {CLOBBER(eol)};
we somehow confuse q.0_1 = q; as assigning the address of the object 'q'.
Some addr vs deref mismatch somewhere in the code.
A regression with -Wall.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* [Bug tree-optimization/106868] [12/13 Regression] Bogus -Wdangling-pointer warning with -O1
2022-09-07 8:47 [Bug c/106868] New: Bogus -Wdangling-pointer warning with -O1 medhefgo at web dot de
2022-09-07 9:05 ` [Bug tree-optimization/106868] [12/13 Regression] " rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2022-09-12 16:18 ` msebor at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-09-12 17:04 ` msebor at gcc dot gnu.org
` (5 subsequent siblings)
7 siblings, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: msebor at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2022-09-12 16:18 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106868
--- Comment #2 from Martin Sebor <msebor at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #1)
> Confirmed.
>
> <bb 2> [local count: 1073741824]:
> alloc (&q);
> q.0_1 = q;
> *p_4(D) = q.0_1;
> q ={v} {CLOBBER(eol)};
> a_8 = __builtin_memcpy (q.0_1, "", 1);
> *a_8 = 0;
> return;
...
> we somehow confuse q.0_1 = q; as assigning the address of the object 'q'.
The reason for the false positive is plain to see in the IL: the memcpy call is
passed a copy of the clobbered q. It then returns another copy of the same q
which is then used to dereference whatever the pointer points to. The warning
is due to the (known) mismatch between how the optimizers and the warning
interpret clobbers: (IIUC) the optimizers treat it as the value of the assigned
variable alone becoming indeterminate, while the warning as all copies of it
becoming so.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* [Bug tree-optimization/106868] [12/13 Regression] Bogus -Wdangling-pointer warning with -O1
2022-09-07 8:47 [Bug c/106868] New: Bogus -Wdangling-pointer warning with -O1 medhefgo at web dot de
2022-09-07 9:05 ` [Bug tree-optimization/106868] [12/13 Regression] " rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-09-12 16:18 ` msebor at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2022-09-12 17:04 ` msebor at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-12-05 9:41 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
` (4 subsequent siblings)
7 siblings, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: msebor at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2022-09-12 17:04 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106868
--- Comment #3 from Martin Sebor <msebor at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to Martin Sebor from comment #2)
...
Actually, scratch that, sorry. Richard is right that the false positive is due
to a bug in the warning code. The following patch resolves it:
diff --git a/gcc/gimple-ssa-warn-access.cc b/gcc/gimple-ssa-warn-access.cc
index 04aa849a4b1..79093b46906 100644
--- a/gcc/gimple-ssa-warn-access.cc
+++ b/gcc/gimple-ssa-warn-access.cc
@@ -4467,6 +4467,7 @@ pass_waccess::gimple_call_return_arg_ref (gcall *call)
{
access_ref aref;
if (m_ptr_qry.get_ref (arg, call, &aref, 0)
+ && aref.deref < 0
&& DECL_P (aref.ref))
return aref.ref;
}
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* [Bug tree-optimization/106868] [12/13 Regression] Bogus -Wdangling-pointer warning with -O1
2022-09-07 8:47 [Bug c/106868] New: Bogus -Wdangling-pointer warning with -O1 medhefgo at web dot de
` (2 preceding siblings ...)
2022-09-12 17:04 ` msebor at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2022-12-05 9:41 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-12-05 13:56 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org
` (3 subsequent siblings)
7 siblings, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2022-12-05 9:41 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106868
Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #4 from Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
I'm testing a variant of the patch that instead makes the argument pass-through
work the same as the PHI pass-through which instead does
if (!m_ptr_qry.get_ref (arg, phi, &aref, 0)
|| (aref.deref == 0
&& POINTER_TYPE_P (TREE_TYPE (aref.ref))))
continue;
thus disallows aref.deref == 0 with pointer type which is what happens in
this case as well.
OTOH it doesn't make much sense to me either - but then the .get_ref
documentation is very sparse and the API very complicated.
I _think_ that the get_ref (via compute_objsize) returns the object
that 'arg' references (points-to) in aref.ref, but how aref.deref
is then set is a mystery to me. It _seems_ that we want to have
< 0 here as martin indicated but that would mean the PHI case is
wrong as well (and the POINTER_TYPE_P check very odd). It also
seems that for the call case we might want to call
check_dangling_uses (var, aref.ref, true) for aref.deref == 0?
I'm going to test this piecewise.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* [Bug tree-optimization/106868] [12/13 Regression] Bogus -Wdangling-pointer warning with -O1
2022-09-07 8:47 [Bug c/106868] New: Bogus -Wdangling-pointer warning with -O1 medhefgo at web dot de
` (3 preceding siblings ...)
2022-12-05 9:41 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2022-12-05 13:56 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-12-05 14:06 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
` (2 subsequent siblings)
7 siblings, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2022-12-05 13:56 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106868
--- Comment #5 from CVS Commits <cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
The master branch has been updated by Richard Biener <rguenth@gcc.gnu.org>:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:d492d50f644811327c5976e2c918ab6d906ed40c
commit r13-4494-gd492d50f644811327c5976e2c918ab6d906ed40c
Author: Richard Biener <rguenther@suse.de>
Date: Mon Dec 5 10:13:13 2022 +0100
tree-optimization/106868 - bogus -Wdangling-pointer diagnostic
The testcase shows we mishandle the case where there's a pass-through
of a pointer through a function like memcpy. The following adjusts
handling of this copy case to require a taken address and adjust
the PHI case similarly.
PR tree-optimization/106868
* gimple-ssa-warn-access.cc
(pass_waccess::gimple_call_return_arg_ref):
Inline into single user ...
(pass_waccess::check_dangling_uses): ... here and adjust the
call and the PHI case to require that ref.aref is the address
of the decl.
* gcc.dg/Wdangling-pointer-pr106868.c: New testcase.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* [Bug tree-optimization/106868] [12/13 Regression] Bogus -Wdangling-pointer warning with -O1
2022-09-07 8:47 [Bug c/106868] New: Bogus -Wdangling-pointer warning with -O1 medhefgo at web dot de
` (4 preceding siblings ...)
2022-12-05 13:56 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2022-12-05 14:06 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-12-12 11:20 ` [Bug tree-optimization/106868] [12 " cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-12-12 11:20 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
7 siblings, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2022-12-05 14:06 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106868
Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Known to fail| |12.2.0
Known to work| |13.0
--- Comment #6 from Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Fixed on trunk sofar, thanks for the report and sorry for the long silence.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* [Bug tree-optimization/106868] [12 Regression] Bogus -Wdangling-pointer warning with -O1
2022-09-07 8:47 [Bug c/106868] New: Bogus -Wdangling-pointer warning with -O1 medhefgo at web dot de
` (5 preceding siblings ...)
2022-12-05 14:06 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2022-12-12 11:20 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-12-12 11:20 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
7 siblings, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2022-12-12 11:20 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106868
--- Comment #7 from CVS Commits <cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
The releases/gcc-12 branch has been updated by Richard Biener
<rguenth@gcc.gnu.org>:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:ad6ace70ba38d2052eeb5adb9672d33f59867be0
commit r12-8972-gad6ace70ba38d2052eeb5adb9672d33f59867be0
Author: Richard Biener <rguenther@suse.de>
Date: Mon Dec 5 10:13:13 2022 +0100
tree-optimization/106868 - bogus -Wdangling-pointer diagnostic
The testcase shows we mishandle the case where there's a pass-through
of a pointer through a function like memcpy. The following adjusts
handling of this copy case to require a taken address and adjust
the PHI case similarly.
PR tree-optimization/106868
* gimple-ssa-warn-access.cc
(pass_waccess::gimple_call_return_arg_ref):
Inline into single user ...
(pass_waccess::check_dangling_uses): ... here and adjust the
call and the PHI case to require that ref.aref is the address
of the decl.
* gcc.dg/Wdangling-pointer-pr106868.c: New testcase.
(cherry picked from commit d492d50f644811327c5976e2c918ab6d906ed40c)
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* [Bug tree-optimization/106868] [12 Regression] Bogus -Wdangling-pointer warning with -O1
2022-09-07 8:47 [Bug c/106868] New: Bogus -Wdangling-pointer warning with -O1 medhefgo at web dot de
` (6 preceding siblings ...)
2022-12-12 11:20 ` [Bug tree-optimization/106868] [12 " cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2022-12-12 11:20 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
7 siblings, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2022-12-12 11:20 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106868
Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Known to work| |12.2.1
Status|ASSIGNED |RESOLVED
Resolution|--- |FIXED
--- Comment #8 from Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Fixed.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread