[Bug middle-end/37722] destructors not called on computed goto

[Bug middle-end/37722] destructors not called on computed goto

[timo.kreuzer at reactos dot org]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37722

Timo Kreuzer <timo.kreuzer at reactos dot org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |timo.kreuzer at reactos dot
                   |                            |org

--- Comment #3 from Timo Kreuzer <timo.kreuzer at reactos dot org> 2013-01-11 14:52:03 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #2)
> int bar(int idx) {
>     static void* const gotos[] = {&&RETRY, &&INSIDE, &&OUTSIDE, &&EVIL};
>     bool first = true;
>     {
>     RETRY:
>         foo<1> f1;
>         if(first) {
>             first = false;

Well usually you cannot declare a variable after a label. That's a gcc
extension. So you should either add curly braces between RETRY and INSIDE, or
move RETRY above the preceeding brace. But that is just syntax, since it would
be desired that it behaved like it would with a normal goto, even if that was
placed like that. (I assume normal gotos will handle this properly)

To theoretically solve the proplem, you could replace every indirect goto with
code like this:

{
    static void* const local_gotos[] = {&&label1, &&label2, &&label3,
&&label4};
    goto *local_gotos[idx];
label1: goto RETRY;
label2: goto INSIDE;
label3: goto OUTSIDE;
label4: goto EVIL;
}

And now have the compiler optimize the pathes.
This way, there are no more crazy jumps, just a very simple indirect jump and a
number of normal jumps that the compiler should be able to handle anyway.

The problem is now, that there might be multiple indirect jumps that use the
same static data, which is just a bunch of void pointers.
So depending on the origin of the jump different pathes would need to be
generated for each target. This is incompatible with an indirect jump
instruction though, which only utilizes some arbitrary address.

One possible solution for this is to always invoke all destructors and
constructors, even for local indirect gotos. So you would need to consider an
indirect jump to always leave all scope blocks, up to the top level of the
function and reenter from there. This would allow to generate labels/codepathes
that are consistent for multiple indirect gotos.

Another solution, is to use multiple jump tables. One table for each indirect
goto containing one entry for each possibly referenced label in the function.
The trick is that the original label addresses, that are produced with the &&
operator will all point to an "array" of direct jmp instructions. all of the
same size. Now the first indirect goto would emit an indirect jump instruction
to the address itself. The second one would substract the address of the first
label, divide by the size of the jmp stub code and use the result as an index
into it's own private jump table. Alternatively a static offset could be added
to the actual address and multiple direct jump stubs would be generated in a
row.

table:
  .long label1, label2, label3, label4;

table2:
  .long label1_from_2, label2_from_2, label3_from_2, label4_from_2;

   // first indirect goto
   mov eax, table[ecx * 4] // get the address from the table
   jmp eax // jump there

   // Second indirect goto
   mov ecx, table[ecx * 4] // get the address from the table
   sub ecx, label1 // substract the address of the first label
   shr ecx, 3 // divide by 8 (assuming each stub is 8 bytes)
   mov eax, table[ecx * 4] // get the address from the 2nd table
   jmp eax // jump there

   // Alternative: using multiple stub arrays
   mov eax, table[ecx * 4] // get the address from the table
   add eax, label5 - label1 // add the offset to the second "jmp array"
   jmp eax // jump there

label1: jmp label1_from_1
label2: jmp label2_from_1
label3: jmp label3_from_1
label4: jmp label4_from_1

label5: jmp label1_from_2
label6: jmp label2_from_2
label7: jmp label3_from_2
label8: jmp label4_from_2

This mechanism would only be needed as soon as multiple indirect jumps could
reference the same labels and different code pathes would need to be
constructed for the targets depending on the origin of the goto.
As an optimization it should be considered that labels, of which the address
has been put in a table, which is now out of scope are not actually available
anymore. Other optimizations might be using 2 different tables directly, if
they are only used for 2 indirect jumps (someone might (mis)use it for
different things like non-local gotos, exception handling, saving the address
of code that is being executed for debugging purposes, etc)

[Bug middle-end/37722] destructors not called on computed goto

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37722

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

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

--- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
*** Bug 103896 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

[Bug middle-end/37722] destructors not called on computed goto

[jakub at gcc dot gnu.org]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37722

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

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

--- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
I think computed gotos are similar to longjmp here, the compiler doesn't know
where exactly the jump will go to and so which variables should be destructed
on a particular computed goto at runtime.
For normal gotos, the compiler knows which scopes will be left and can arrange
for those destructors to be run, and similarly which scopes will be entered and
can complain if construction of some vars is jumped over.
For longjmp, C++ documents it as undefined behavior:
https://eel.is/c++draft/csetjmp.syn#2
I'm afraid for computed gotos all we can do is just document something similar
for leaving the C++ scopes (and C with cleanup attribute) with computed gotos
and  similarly document that any crossed initializations of variables are
undefined behavior (normal gotos crossing initialization are errors in C++ but
not in C).

[Bug middle-end/37722] destructors not called on computed goto

[ndesaulniers at google dot com]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37722

Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers at google dot com> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |ndesaulniers at google dot com

--- Comment #6 from Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers at google dot com> ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #5)
> I'm afraid for computed gotos all we can do is just document something
> similar

Right, clang behaves this way, too. And I don't see how we'd change that, for
all of the reasons above.  If the documentation doesn't mention this edge case
with the computed goto extension, it should be revised to do so.

Then this bug can be closed as "Working as intended" IMO.

[Bug middle-end/37722] destructors not called on computed goto

[cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37722

--- Comment #7 from GCC Commits <cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
The trunk branch has been updated by Jason Merrill <jason@gcc.gnu.org>:

https://gcc.gnu.org/g:4d9e0f3f211c8c459f285b5cddabc9958ad170f8

commit r14-6765-g4d9e0f3f211c8c459f285b5cddabc9958ad170f8
Author: Jason Merrill <jason@redhat.com>
Date:   Wed Dec 20 13:58:16 2023 -0500

    c++: computed goto warning [PR37722]

    PR37722 complains that a computed goto doesn't destroy objects that go out
    of scope.  In the PR we agreed that it never will, but we can warn about
    it.

            PR c++/37722

    gcc/ChangeLog:

            * doc/extend.texi: Document that computed goto does not
            call destructors.

    gcc/cp/ChangeLog:

            * decl.cc (identify_goto): Adjust for computed goto.
            (struct named_label_use_entry): Add computed_goto field.
            (poplevel_named_label_1): Add to computed_goto vec.
            (check_previous_goto_1): Dump computed_goto vec.
            (check_goto_1): Split out from check_goto.
            (check_goto): Check all addressable labels for computed goto.
            (struct named_label_entry): Add addressed field.
            (mark_label_addressed): New.
            * parser.cc (cp_parser_unary_expression): Call it.
            * cp-tree.h (mark_label_addressed): Declare it.

    gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog:

            * g++.dg/ext/label15.C: New test.
            * g++.dg/torture/pr42739.C: Expect warning.

[Bug middle-end/37722] destructors not called on computed goto

[jason at gcc dot gnu.org]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37722

Jason Merrill <jason at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |jason at gcc dot gnu.org
             Status|UNCONFIRMED                 |RESOLVED
           Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org      |jason at gcc dot gnu.org
   Target Milestone|---                         |14.0
         Resolution|---                         |FIXED

--- Comment #8 from Jason Merrill <jason at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Warning and documentation added for GCC 14.

[Bug middle-end/37722] destructors not called on computed goto

[egallager at gcc dot gnu.org]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37722

Eric Gallager <egallager at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
           See Also|                            |https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
                   |                            |a/show_bug.cgi?id=105401
           Keywords|                            |diagnostic

--- Comment #9 from Eric Gallager <egallager at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
see also bug 105401 for another issue about diagnostics and documentation
related to computed gotos

[Bug c++/37722] New: destructors not called on computed goto

[cburger at sunysb dot edu]

#include <iostream>

struct foo {
    foo() { std::cout << "foo constructed\n"; }
   ~foo() { std::cout << "foo destructed\n"; }
};

enum opcode { NOP, FOO, DONE };

void exec0(const opcode* o) {
    loop: switch (*o) {
        case NOP:          ++o; goto loop;
        case FOO: { foo f; ++o; goto loop; } // f destructed
        case DONE:  return;
    }
}

void exec1(const opcode* o) {
    static void* label[] = { &&NOP, &&FOO, &&DONE };
    goto *label[*o];
    NOP:          ++o;   goto *label[*o];
    FOO: { foo f; ++o;   goto *label[*o]; } // f not destructed
//  FOO: { foo f; ++o; } goto *label[*o];   // work-around
    DONE:  return;
}

int main() {
    const opcode program[] = { NOP, FOO, NOP, NOP, DONE };
    exec0(program);
    exec1(program);
    return 0;
}

Output:
foo constructed
foo destructed
foo constructed

Tested with: 4.3.2, 4.2.4, 4.1.3, 3.4.6
Optimization level makes no difference.
Intel icpc 10.1, 9.1 show the same problem.


-- 
           Summary: destructors not called on computed goto
           Product: gcc
           Version: 4.3.2
            Status: UNCONFIRMED
          Severity: normal
          Priority: P3
         Component: c++
        AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
        ReportedBy: cburger at sunysb dot edu
 GCC build triplet: x86_64-linux-gnu
  GCC host triplet: x86_64-linux-gnu
GCC target triplet: x86_64-linux-gnu


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37722

[Bug middle-end/37722] destructors not called on computed goto

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org]

------- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org  2008-10-02 21:22 -------
EH lowering for some reason does not copy the finally part of the try before
the goto.  This also happens with 3.3.


-- 

pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Component|c++                         |middle-end
           Keywords|                            |wrong-code
      Known to fail|                            |3.3 4.4.0 4.0.1


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37722

[Bug middle-end/37722] destructors not called on computed goto

[scovich at gmail dot com]

------- Comment #2 from scovich at gmail dot com  2009-05-09 08:16 -------
Computed gotos can easily make it impossible for the compiler to call
constructors and destructors consistently. This is a major gotcha of computed
gotos for people who have used normal gotos in C++ and expect destructors to be
handled properly. Consider this program, for instance:

#include <stdio.h>
template<int i>
struct foo {
    foo() { printf("%s<%d>\n", __FUNCTION__, i); }
    ~foo() { printf("%s<%d>\n", __FUNCTION__, i); }
};
enum {RETRY, INSIDE, OUTSIDE, EVIL};
int bar(int idx) {
    static void* const gotos[] = {&&RETRY, &&INSIDE, &&OUTSIDE, &&EVIL};
    bool first = true;
    {
    RETRY:
        foo<1> f1;
        if(first) {
            first = false;
            goto *gotos[idx];
        }
    INSIDE:
        return 1;
    }
    if(0) {
        foo<2> f2;
    EVIL:
        return 2;
    }
 OUTSIDE:
    return 0;
}
int main() {
    for(int i=RETRY; i <= EVIL; i++)
        printf("%d\n", bar(i));
    return 0;
}

Not only does it let you jump out of a block without calling destructors, it
lets you jump into one without calling constructors:

$ g++-4.4.0 -Wall -O3 scratch.cpp && ./a.out
foo<1>
foo<1>
~foo<1>
1
foo<1>
~foo<1>
1
foo<1>
0
foo<1>
~foo<2>
2

Ideally, the compiler could analyze possible destinations of the goto
(best-effort, of course) and emit suitable diagnostics:

scratch.cpp:16: warning: computed goto bypasses destructor of 'foo<1> f1'
scratch.cpp:13: warning:   declared here

scratch.cpp:23: warning: possible jump to label 'EVIL'
scratch.cpp:16: warning:   from here
scratch.cpp:22: warning:   crosses initialization of 'foo<2> f2'

In this particular example the compiler should be able to figure out that no
labels reach a live f1 and call its destructor properly. If it's not feasible
to analyze the possible destinations of the computed goto, regular control flow
analysis should at least be able to identify potentially dangerous labels and
gotos, e.g.:

scratch.cpp:16: warning: computed goto may bypass destructor of 'foo<1> f1'
scratch.cpp:13: warning:   declared here

scratch.cpp:23: warning: jump to label 'EVIL'
scratch.cpp:8:  warning:   using a computed goto
scratch.cpp:22: warning:   may cross initialization of 'foo<2> f2'


-- 

scovich at gmail dot com changed:

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


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37722