[Bug middle-end/28865] Structures with a flexible arrray member have wrong .size

[Bug middle-end/28865] Structures with a flexible arrray member have wrong .size

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28865

Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |fredrickprashanth at gmail
                   |                            |dot com

--- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org> 2013-04-08 21:57:03 UTC ---
*** Bug 56880 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

[Bug middle-end/28865] Structures with a flexible arrray member have wrong .size

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28865

Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |algrant at acm dot org

--- Comment #5 from Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org> 2013-04-08 21:57:28 UTC ---
*** Bug 39383 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

[Bug middle-end/28865] Structures with a flexible arrray member have wrong .size

[hjl.tools at gmail dot com]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28865

H.J. Lu <hjl.tools at gmail dot com> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Known to fail|                            |

--- Comment #6 from H.J. Lu <hjl.tools at gmail dot com> 2013-04-08 22:39:02 UTC ---
A patch is posted at

http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2009-04/msg01807.html

[Bug middle-end/28865] Structures with a flexible arrray member have wrong .size

[schwab@linux-m68k.org]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28865

Andreas Schwab <schwab@linux-m68k.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
           Keywords|                            |wrong-code
   Target Milestone|---                         |4.7.4
      Known to fail|                            |4.7.1, 4.8.0

--- Comment #8 from Andreas Schwab <schwab@linux-m68k.org> 2013-04-20 09:54:32 UTC ---
This is causing wrong code for libnss_files.so (_nss_files_init from
nss/files-init.c, only called by nscd) on powerpc due to the use of
-fsection-anchors, since the anchor offsets are computed from the wrong size
information.

[Bug middle-end/28865] Structures with a flexible arrray member have wrong .size

[amodra at gmail dot com]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28865

--- Comment #9 from Alan Modra <amodra at gmail dot com> 2013-05-04 14:34:39 UTC ---
>From what I see on current mainline for a testcase based on
glibc/nss/nss_files/files-init.c the var_decl size and the type size agree and
are correct.  What causes a problem with -fsection-anchors is that the actual
data emitted by output_constant() is wrong.

struct traced_file
{
  long pad;
  char fname[];
};

#define TF(id, filename, ...)                    \
union                                \
{                                \
  struct traced_file file;                    \
  char buf[sizeof (struct traced_file) + sizeof (filename)];    \
} id##_traced_file =                        \
  {                                \
    .file =                            \
    {                                \
      .fname = filename                        \
    }                                \
  }

TF (pwd, "/etc/passwd");
TF (grp, "/etc/group");

Gives me

    .file    "unioninit.c"
    .globl grp_traced_file
    .globl pwd_traced_file
    .section    ".data"
    .align 2
.LANCB0:
    .org .LANCB0+0
    .type    grp_traced_file, @object
    .size    grp_traced_file, 16
grp_traced_file:
    .zero    4
    .string    "/etc/group"
    .zero    12
    .org .LANCB0+16
    .type    pwd_traced_file, @object
    .size    pwd_traced_file, 16
pwd_traced_file:
    .zero    4
    .string    "/etc/passwd"
    .zero    12
    .ident    "GCC: (GNU) 4.9.0 20130502 (experimental)"
    .section    .note.GNU-stack,"",@progbits

Those ".zero 12" lines shouldn't be there.

[Bug middle-end/28865] Structures with a flexible arrray member have wrong .size

[amodra at gmail dot com]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28865

--- Comment #10 from Alan Modra <amodra at gmail dot com> 2013-05-04 14:39:34 UTC ---
Incidentall, I expect the patch referred to in comment #6 will ICE with
tree-checking on due to CONSTRUCTOR nodes not having the required fields for
DECL_SIZE_UNIT.

[Bug middle-end/28865] Structures with a flexible arrray member have wrong .size

[jakub at gcc dot gnu.org]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28865

Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |nickc at gcc dot gnu.org

--- Comment #11 from Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
*** Bug 59719 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

[Bug middle-end/28865] Structures with a flexible arrray member have wrong .size

[jakub at gcc dot gnu.org]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28865

Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |jakub at gcc dot gnu.org

--- Comment #12 from Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
*** Bug 59741 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

[Bug middle-end/28865] Structures with a flexible arrray member have wrong .size

[jakub at gcc dot gnu.org]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28865

--- Comment #13 from Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Runtime testcase that presumably fails on -fsection-anchors targets:
struct A { int a; char b[]; };
union B { struct A a; char b[sizeof (struct A) + 31]; };
union B b = { { 1, "123456789012345678901234567890" } };
union B c = { { 2, "123456789012345678901234567890" } };

__attribute__((noinline, noclone)) void
foo (int *x[2])
{
  x[0] = &b.a.a;
  x[1] = &c.a.a;
}

int
main ()
{
  int *x[2];
  foo (x);
  if (*x[0] != 1 || *x[1] != 2)
    __builtin_abort ();
  return 0;
}

[Bug middle-end/28865] Structures with a flexible arrray member have wrong .size

[bergner at gcc dot gnu.org]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28865

Peter Bergner <bergner at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |bergner at gcc dot gnu.org

--- Comment #14 from Peter Bergner <bergner at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #13)
> Runtime testcase that presumably fails on -fsection-anchors targets:
> struct A { int a; char b[]; };
> union B { struct A a; char b[sizeof (struct A) + 31]; };
> union B b = { { 1, "123456789012345678901234567890" } };
> union B c = { { 2, "123456789012345678901234567890" } };
...

I hit the abort on powerpc64-linux with a mainline from December (only mainline
build handy at the moment) and we are a -fsection-anchors target.

[Bug middle-end/28865] Structures with a flexible arrray member have wrong .size

[nickc at gcc dot gnu.org]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28865

--- Comment #15 from Nick Clifton <nickc at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Created attachment 31802
  --> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=31802&action=edit
Fix gcc's emission of assembler directives for a variable length structure

Hi Guys,

  I think that the problem is the output_constant function in varasm.c which is
given a target size, but which can emit more bytes than expected if the
expression is a variable length structure.

  This patch updates output_constant so that it returns the number of bytes
that it really did emit, and it updates a couple of places where
output_constant is used so that this corrected size is taken into account.

  Tested without regressions on an i686-pc-linux-gnu toolchain and an
aarch64-elf toolchain.  Does anyone have any objections to my submitting the
patch to gcc-patches ?

Cheers
  Nick

[Bug middle-end/28865] Structures with a flexible arrray member have wrong .size

[amodra at gmail dot com]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28865

--- Comment #16 from Alan Modra <amodra at gmail dot com> ---
Hi Nick, that patch looks exactly like my first attempt to fix this bug.  I
forget the details now but I'm fairly certain it wasn't a complete fix, which
is why I didn't submit my patch..

Note that the underlying bug here doesn't just cause a wrong .size to be
emitted, but wrongly sized initialization data.  On -fsection-anchors targets
that results in seriously wrong code.  Variables following a too-large
initializer are located at the wrong address..
See http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2013-05/msg00246.html for a patch that
makes the assembler complain loudly if gcc emits wrong code.

[Bug middle-end/28865] Structures with a flexible arrray member have wrong .size

[amodra at gmail dot com]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28865

--- Comment #17 from Alan Modra <amodra at gmail dot com> ---
I believe Eric's comment
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2013-05/msg00179.html points at the correct
fix, but it's a bit messy.  You need to recursively descend both "decl" and
"init" in code like c-decl.c:finish_decl, updating "decl" component sizes for
any variable length arrays you find, rather than handling just a top level
variable length array as we do currently.  Then repeat the exercise for other
language versions of finish_decl..

[Bug middle-end/28865] Structures with a flexible arrray member have wrong .size

[amodra at gmail dot com]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28865

--- Comment #19 from Alan Modra <amodra at gmail dot com> ---
Jakub, you're correct.  I should have read the standard on flexible array
members before poking at this bug last year.  Nick's patch is looking good to
me.

ISO/IEC 9899:1999 is quite clear that the answer to comment #2 is that sizeof
does *not* include the flexible array component (but it does include any
padding needed to align the start of the flexible array).  I think it is
reasonable to do the same for .size and not include the flexible array
component there too.

The testcase (which is invalid code IMO) in comment #3 hits this assert in
varasm.c:

  /* Advance to offset of this element.
     Note no alignment needed in an array, since that is guaranteed
     if each element has the proper size.  */
  if ((local->field != NULL_TREE || local->index != NULL_TREE)
      && fieldpos != local->total_bytes)
    {
      gcc_assert (fieldpos >= local->total_bytes);

[Bug middle-end/28865] Structures with a flexible arrray member have wrong .size

[jakub at gcc dot gnu.org]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28865

Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |jsm28 at gcc dot gnu.org

--- Comment #20 from Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to Alan Modra from comment #19)
> Jakub, you're correct.  I should have read the standard on flexible array
> members before poking at this bug last year.  Nick's patch is looking good
> to me.
> 
> ISO/IEC 9899:1999 is quite clear that the answer to comment #2 is that
> sizeof does *not* include the flexible array component (but it does include
> any padding needed to align the start of the flexible array).  I think it is
> reasonable to do the same for .size and not include the flexible array
> component there too.

Well, sizeof is clear, but .size doesn't need to be the same thing, IMHO .size
really should be DECL_SIZE of the decl and we do adjust that for the flexible
array member in there.  If .size would be just e.g. TYPE_SIZE, then there could
be e.g. problems with copy relocations.
> 
> The testcase (which is invalid code IMO) in comment #3 hits this assert in
> varasm.c:

The #c3 is invalid, I agree, how can you have an array if each array entry has
a different size?  I mean, the C standard allows flexible array members only at
the toplevel and not initialized, as GNU extension we allow it to be
initialized and allow it even in some cases where it is not toplevel, but where
it is still reasonable (e.g. the case where it is at the end of struct which is
inside a union is reasonable, so would be placing it at the end of another
structure, but placing it in an array is IMHO something that should be rejected
by the FE).
CCing Joseph on it.

[Bug middle-end/28865] Structures with a flexible arrray member have wrong .size

[joseph at codesourcery dot com]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28865

--- Comment #21 from joseph at codesourcery dot com <joseph at codesourcery dot com> ---
The reason for laxity about flexible array member constraints is existing 
code violating them, as in the glibc header code quoted in 
<http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2002-08/msg01149.html>.  I don't know 
whether there is existing such code for the array case or not.

[Bug middle-end/28865] Structures with a flexible arrray member have wrong .size

[jakub at gcc dot gnu.org]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28865

--- Comment #22 from Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
But the glibc headers case you're mentioning wasn't initializing the flexible
array members, right?  (Or even initialization with {} initializer is fine I
guess).  I mean, while C doesn't allow it, if you don't initialize the flexible
array member followed by something else, it should still work fine as if it was
a zero-sized array.  But even in the struct A { struct B { int a; char b[]; };
int c; }; case, I'd say we should error when trying to initialize b to
something non-empty, because we shouldn't be changing the types (thus offsets
in the type fields, type sizes etc.) based on the initializer, only DECL_SIZE
can.
So IMHO we should accept:
struct A { int a; char b[]; };
struct B { struct A a; int c; } b;
struct A p[24];
struct B c = { { 5, {} }, 6 };
struct A q[2] = { { 5, {} }, { 6, {} } };
but reject:
struct B d = { { 1, { 2 } }, 3 };
struct B e = { { 2, "abc" }, 4 };
struct A r[2] = { { 5, "a" }, { 6, "b" } };

[Bug middle-end/28865] Structures with a flexible arrray member have wrong .size

[nickc at gcc dot gnu.org]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28865

Nick Clifton <nickc at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
  Attachment #31802|0                           |1
        is obsolete|                            |

--- Comment #23 from Nick Clifton <nickc at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Created attachment 31823
  --> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=31823&action=edit
Revised patch, with testcases

Hi Guys,

I have uploaded a revised patch with two changes:

  1. I have removed the assertion from
     output_constructor_regular_field() and changed the code so that
     extra zeros are emitted only if fieldpos is more than the current
     byte total.  I made this change because I feel that we should avoid
     ICEs even on invalid code.

  2. I have added two tests to the testsuite, based on comments 3 and
     13.

  Still no regressions with an i686-pc-linux-gnu toolchain and an
  aarch64-elf toolchain.

  OK to apply ?

Cheers
  Nick

gcc/ChangeLog
2014-01-13  Nick Clifton  <nickc@redhat.com>

    PR middle-end/28865
    * varasm.c (output_consant): Return the number of bytes actually
    emitted.
    (output_constructor_array_range): Update the field size with the
    number of bytes emitted by output_constant.
    (output_constructor_regular_field): Likewise.  Also do not
    complain if the total number of bytes emitted is now greater
    than the expected fieldpos.
    * output.h (output_constant): Update prototype and descriptive
    comment.

gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog
2014-01-13  Nick Clifton  <nickc@redhat.com>

    PR middle-end/28865
    * gcc.c-torture/compile/pr28865.c: New.
    * gcc.c-torture/execute/pr28865.c: New.

[Bug middle-end/28865] Structures with a flexible arrray member have wrong .size

[amodra at gmail dot com]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28865

--- Comment #24 from Alan Modra <amodra at gmail dot com> ---
Nick's latest patch passes bootstrap and regression testing powerpc64-linux.

[Bug middle-end/28865] Structures with a flexible arrray member have wrong .size

[nickc at gcc dot gnu.org]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28865

--- Comment #26 from Nick Clifton <nickc at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Author: nickc
Date: Thu Jan 16 12:17:48 2014
New Revision: 206661

URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=206661&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR middle-end/28865

    * varasm.c (output_constant): Return the number of bytes actually
    emitted.
    (output_constructor_array_range): Update the field size with the
    number of bytes emitted by output_constant.
    (output_constructor_regular_field): Likewise.  Also do not
     complain if the total number of bytes emitted is now greater
    than the expected fieldpos.
    * output.h (output_constant): Update prototype and descriptive
    comment.

    * gcc.c-torture/compile/pr28865.c: New.
    * gcc.c-torture/execute/pr28865.c: New.

Added:
    trunk/gcc/testsuite/gcc.c-torture/compile/pr28865.c
    trunk/gcc/testsuite/gcc.c-torture/execute/pr28865.c
Modified:
    trunk/gcc/ChangeLog
    trunk/gcc/output.h
    trunk/gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog
    trunk/gcc/varasm.c

[Bug middle-end/28865] Structures with a flexible arrray member have wrong .size

[nickc at gcc dot gnu.org]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28865

Nick Clifton <nickc at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|NEW                         |RESOLVED
         Resolution|---                         |FIXED

--- Comment #27 from Nick Clifton <nickc at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
The patch has now been approved and checked in:

http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2014-01/msg00812.html

[Bug c/28865] New: Structures with a flexible arrray member have wrong .size

[qrczak at knm dot org dot pl]

For example this C:
struct {int x; int y[];} obj = {1, {2, 3}};

produces this assembly:

.globl obj
        .data
        .align 4
        .type   obj, @object
        .size   obj, 4
obj:
        .long   1
        .long   2
        .long   3

.size should include the flexible array component.


-- 
           Summary: Structures with a flexible arrray member have wrong
                    .size
           Product: gcc
           Version: 4.2.0
            Status: UNCONFIRMED
          Severity: normal
          Priority: P3
         Component: c
        AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
        ReportedBy: qrczak at knm dot org dot pl
 GCC build triplet: i686-pc-linux-gnu
  GCC host triplet: i686-pc-linux-gnu
GCC target triplet: i686-pc-linux-gnu


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28865

[Bug middle-end/28865] Structures with a flexible arrray member have wrong .size

[qrczak at knm dot org dot pl]

------- Comment #1 from qrczak at knm dot org dot pl  2006-08-27 22:15 -------
A question: when this is fixed, what should be C-level sizeof obj?

I hope it would include the flexible array component. This would allow to
detect in autoconf whether this bug is fixed, and would be consistent with
toplevel arrays whose sizes are derived from their initializer.


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28865

[Bug middle-end/28865] Structures with a flexible arrray member have wrong .size

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org]

------- Comment #2 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org  2006-08-28 03:08 -------
Confirmed, not a regression.


-- 

pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|UNCONFIRMED                 |NEW
     Ever Confirmed|0                           |1
  GCC build triplet|i686-pc-linux-gnu           |
   GCC host triplet|i686-pc-linux-gnu           |
 GCC target triplet|i686-pc-linux-gnu           |
      Known to fail|                            |3.0.4 4.0.0 4.1.0 4.2.0
                   |                            |3.3.3 3.2.3 3.4.0
   Last reconfirmed|0000-00-00 00:00:00         |2006-08-28 03:08:51
               date|                            |


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28865

[Bug middle-end/28865] Structures with a flexible arrray member have wrong .size

[lauro dot venancio at gmail dot com]

------- Comment #3 from lauro dot venancio at gmail dot com  2007-12-03 23:42 -------
I think I'm facing a related problem. GCC is emitting unaligned array elements. 

struct ccstm {
        int32_t val;
        const char descr[];
};

static const struct ccstm canon_d30custom[] = {
  { 1, "Long exposure noise reduction" },
  { 2, "Shutter/AE lock buttons" },
  { 3, "Mirror lockup" }
};

produces this assembly for arm-linux-gnueabi:

.align 2
canon_d30custom:
.word 1
.ascii "Long exposure noise reduction\000"
.word 2
.ascii "Shutter/AE lock buttons\000"
.word 3
.ascii "Mirror lockup\000"

Note that the second and the third array element are unaligned.


-- 

lauro dot venancio at gmail dot com changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |lauro dot venancio at gmail
                   |                            |dot com


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28865