[Bug c++/45940] New: [trans-mem] Error of unsafe function even if annotated

[Bug c++/45940] New: [trans-mem] Error of unsafe function even if annotated

[vincent.gramoli at epfl dot ch]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45940

           Summary: [trans-mem] Error of unsafe function even if annotated
           Product: gcc
           Version: unknown
            Status: UNCONFIRMED
          Severity: normal
          Priority: P3
         Component: c++
        AssignedTo: unassigned@gcc.gnu.org
        ReportedBy: vincent.gramoli@epfl.ch
                CC: rth@gcc.gnu.org, aldyh@gcc.gnu.org


When I compile a transactional program which use an annotated STL, GCC
compilation says that the function is not safe even if it is annotated.

I have attached the ii file (I tried to make it smaller but it didn't
figure out when it happens).

Here the compilation:
$ g++ -O0 -c -Wall -g -fgnu-tm -fno-builtin Building.ii
In file included from src/Building.cpp:77:0:
src/Building.cpp:1341:27: error: unsafe function call ‘void
std::list<_Tp, _Alloc>::push_front(const value_type&) [with _Tp =
Bullet*, _Alloc = std::allocator<Bullet*>, value_type = Bullet*]’ within
‘transaction_safe’ function

Extract from STL source:
__attribute__((transaction_pure))
       void
       push_front(const value_type& __x)
       { this->_M_insert(begin(), __x); }

[Bug c++/45940] [trans-mem] Error of unsafe function even if annotated

[patrick.marlier at gmail dot com]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45940

--- Comment #1 from Patrick Marlier <patrick.marlier at gmail dot com> 2010-11-04 14:36:42 UTC ---
Created attachment 22282
  --> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=22282
.ii file

same file as sent by email few time ago.

[Bug c++/45940] [trans-mem] Error of unsafe function even if annotated

[aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45940

Aldy Hernandez <aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|UNCONFIRMED                 |NEW
   Last reconfirmed|                            |2010.11.19 18:17:31
         AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot       |aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org
                   |gnu.org                     |
     Ever Confirmed|0                           |1

--- Comment #2 from Aldy Hernandez <aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org> 2010-11-19 18:17:31 UTC ---
Mine

[Bug c++/45940] [trans-mem] Error of unsafe function even if annotated

[aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45940

--- Comment #3 from Aldy Hernandez <aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org> 2010-11-23 13:44:45 UTC ---
I have a patch to fix this problem, but I also see that the provided testcase
has another error message which I think is correct:

In file included from src/Building.cpp:77:0:
src/Building.cpp:56:34: error: unsafe function call 'void std::list<_Tp,
_Alloc>::push_back(const value_type&) [with _Tp = Building*, _Alloc =
std::allocator<Building*>, value_type = Building*]' within 'transaction_safe'
function

push_back() is not annotated as transaction_pure.

Please verify that this is the case on your end, because my upcoming patch will
only fix the error in the PR, not this additional error I see.

[Bug c++/45940] [trans-mem] Error of unsafe function even if annotated

[patrick.marlier at gmail dot com]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45940

Patrick Marlier <patrick.marlier at gmail dot com> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |patrick.marlier at gmail
                   |                            |dot com

--- Comment #4 from Patrick Marlier <patrick.marlier at gmail dot com> 2010-11-23 15:11:49 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #3)
> push_back() is not annotated as transaction_pure.

True. It was just a annotation test and thus others functions are not
annotated. So it seems correct.

> Please verify that this is the case on your end, because my upcoming patch will
> only fix the error in the PR, not this additional error I see.

I think it is ok. Did you send the patch in gcc-patches?

Patrick Marlier.

[Bug c++/45940] [trans-mem] Error of unsafe function even if annotated

[aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45940

Aldy Hernandez <aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|NEW                         |WAITING

--- Comment #5 from Aldy Hernandez <aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org> 2010-11-23 15:53:43 UTC ---
Fixed by:

http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2010-11/msg02354.html

Waiting for approval.

[Bug c++/45940] [trans-mem] Error of unsafe function even if annotated

[aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45940

Aldy Hernandez <aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:

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

[Bug c++/45940] [trans-mem] Error of unsafe function even if annotated

[patrick.marlier at gmail dot com]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45940

--- Comment #6 from Patrick Marlier <patrick.marlier at gmail dot com> 2010-11-25 09:57:32 UTC ---
Created attachment 22526
  --> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=22526
another testcase

It seems not completely solved.

Here a another testcase.

With -O0, it complains about unsafe function even if annotated as
transaction_pure.

gcc -Wall -c -O0 -fgnu-tm unsafe.cpp -o unsafe
unsafe.cpp:38:54: error: unsafe function call ‘int
atomic_exchange_and_add(int*, int)’ within ‘transaction_safe’ function

With -O1, ICE in expand_block_tm().

gcc -Wall -c -O1 -fgnu-tm unsafe.cpp -o unsafe
unsafe.cpp: In function ‘int main()’:
unsafe.cpp:73:5: internal compiler error: in expand_block_tm, at
trans-mem.c:2254
Please submit a full bug report,
with preprocessed source if appropriate.
See <http://gcc.gnu.org/bugs.html> for instructions.

Vincent, please reopen the bug and in the bug description set version to
"trans-mem" (easier to find it).

Patrick Marlier.

[Bug c++/45940] [trans-mem] Error of unsafe function even if annotated

[vincent.gramoli at epfl dot ch]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45940

Vincent Gramoli <vincent.gramoli at epfl dot ch> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|RESOLVED                    |REOPENED
            Version|unknown                     |trans-mem
         Resolution|FIXED                       |

--- Comment #7 from Vincent Gramoli <vincent.gramoli at epfl dot ch> 2010-11-25 15:25:05 UTC ---
As Patrick has written above, there is still an issue.

[Bug c++/45940] [trans-mem] Error of unsafe function even if annotated

[aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45940

Aldy Hernandez <aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|REOPENED                    |WAITING

--- Comment #8 from Aldy Hernandez <aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org> 2010-11-29 15:38:44 UTC ---
This fixes the -O0 case.  Pending approval.

http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2010-11/msg02803.html

[Bug c++/45940] [trans-mem] Error of unsafe function even if annotated

[aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45940

--- Comment #9 from Aldy Hernandez <aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org> 2010-11-29 16:04:18 UTC ---
The -O1 ICE is due to the fact that we have an inline function that has been
marked as transaction_pure, but contains an inline asm.  The following code
sets the 'saw_unsafe' bit, regardless of the transaction_pure attribute:

    case GIMPLE_ASM:
      /* ??? We ought to come up with a way to add attributes to
     asm statements, and then add "transaction_safe" to it.
     Either that or get the language spec to resurrect __tm_waiver.  */
      if (d->block_flags & DIAG_TM_SAFE)
    error_at (gimple_location (stmt),
          "asm not allowed in atomic transaction");
      else if (d->func_flags & DIAG_TM_SAFE)
        error_at (gimple_location (stmt),
          "asm not allowed in %<transaction_safe%> function");
      else
    d->saw_unsafe = true;
      break;

The easy way to solve this, is to pass the fndecl in d->, and check for
transaction_pure attributes.  The hard way, is to add attributes to asm
statements (see comment above), mark asm statements as safe/pure when
appropriate, and never loose this information.

You can guess which way I want to solve it.

Richard?

[Bug c++/45940] [trans-mem] Error of unsafe function even if annotated

[aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45940

Aldy Hernandez <aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
           Priority|P3                          |P1

[Bug c++/45940] [trans-mem] Error of unsafe function even if annotated

[aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45940

--- Comment #10 from Aldy Hernandez <aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org> 2010-12-13 14:15:49 UTC ---
[offline rth notes]

In function_attribute_inlinable_p, if fndecl is tm_pure and
current_function_decl is tm_safe, deny the inlining.

    This is because tm_pure is the only escape hatch we
    have for "do not annotate this".  E.g. you want to 
    add a call to printf for debugging, or there's some
    data you know that shouldn't be part of the transaction.

    The fix for this is to implement __tm_waiver.  But you
    know yourself how tricky getting just the transaction
    blocks correct has been.  Adding holes within the
    region is... nasty.  But probably required eventually.

In inline_forbidden_p_stmt, notice asms and prevent them from
being inlined if current_function_decl is tm_safe.

    This will stop early inlining from breaking tm_safe
    functions when dealing with e.g. system header files
    that include inline asms.

[Bug c++/45940] [trans-mem] Error of unsafe function even if annotated

[aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45940

--- Comment #11 from Aldy Hernandez <aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org> 2010-12-13 14:48:50 UTC ---
Fixed on mainline, but I will leave the PR open until a more thorough fix is
committed.

[Bug c++/45940] [trans-mem] Error of unsafe function even if annotated

[aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45940

Aldy Hernandez <aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
           Priority|P1                          |P4

[Bug c++/45940] [trans-mem] Error of unsafe function even if annotated

[aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45940

Aldy Hernandez <aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
           Severity|normal                      |enhancement

[Bug c++/45940] [trans-mem] Error of unsafe function even if annotated

[aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45940

--- Comment #12 from Aldy Hernandez <aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org> 2011-01-14 18:18:07 UTC ---
Properly fixed here; awaiting approval.

http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2011-01/msg01003.html

[Bug c++/45940] [trans-mem] Error of unsafe function even if annotated

[aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45940

Aldy Hernandez <aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:

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

[Bug c++/45940] [trans-mem] Error of unsafe function even if annotated

[vincent.gramoli at epfl dot ch]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45940

--- Comment #13 from Vincent Gramoli <vincent.gramoli at epfl dot ch> 2011-01-20 10:28:03 UTC ---
I updated and got the following problem while recompiling. Could it be related
to your recent changes somehow?

gcc -o gnupg/sha1.o -c -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -D_GNU_SOURCE=1 -D_REENTRANT
-Ilibgag/include -I. -I/usr/include/SDL gnupg/sha1.c
ar rc gnupg/libgnupg.a gnupg/sha1.o
ranlib gnupg/libgnupg.a
g++ -o libgag/src/BinaryStream.o -c -Wall -g -fgnu-tm -fno-builtin
-DHAVE_CONFIG_H -D_GNU_SOURCE=1 -D_REENTRANT -Ilibgag/include -I.
-I/usr/include/SDL libgag/src/BinaryStream.cpp
In file included from
/home/gramoli/velox/gcc-tm-install/lib/gcc/i686-pc-linux-gnu/4.6.0/../../../../include/c++/4.6.0/bits/localefwd.h:42:0,
                 from
/home/gramoli/velox/gcc-tm-install/lib/gcc/i686-pc-linux-gnu/4.6.0/../../../../include/c++/4.6.0/string:45,
                 from libgag/include/Stream.h:25,
                 from libgag/include/BinaryStream.h:23,
                 from libgag/src/BinaryStream.cpp:20:
/home/gramoli/velox/gcc-tm-install/lib/gcc/i686-pc-linux-gnu/4.6.0/../../../../include/c++/4.6.0/i686-pc-linux-gnu/bits/c++locale.h:
In function ‘int std::__convert_from_v(int* const&, char*, int, const char*,
...)’:
/home/gramoli/velox/gcc-tm-install/lib/gcc/i686-pc-linux-gnu/4.6.0/../../../../include/c++/4.6.0/i686-pc-linux-gnu/bits/c++locale.h:65:24:
error: call to function ‘void* operator new [](unsigned int)’ which throws
incomplete type ‘struct std::bad_alloc’
In file included from
/home/gramoli/velox/gcc-tm-install/lib/gcc/i686-pc-linux-gnu/4.6.0/../../../../include/c++/4.6.0/valarray:87:0,
                 from libgag/src/BinaryStream.cpp:22:
/home/gramoli/velox/gcc-tm-install/lib/gcc/i686-pc-linux-gnu/4.6.0/../../../../include/c++/4.6.0/bits/valarray_array.h:
In function ‘void* std::__valarray_get_memory(size_t)’:
/home/gramoli/velox/gcc-tm-install/lib/gcc/i686-pc-linux-gnu/4.6.0/../../../../include/c++/4.6.0/bits/valarray_array.h:53:28:
error: call to function ‘void* operator new(unsigned int)’ which throws
incomplete type ‘struct std::bad_alloc’
In file included from
/home/gramoli/velox/gcc-tm-install/lib/gcc/i686-pc-linux-gnu/4.6.0/../../../../include/c++/4.6.0/valarray:564:0,
                 from libgag/src/BinaryStream.cpp:22:
/home/gramoli/velox/gcc-tm-install/lib/gcc/i686-pc-linux-gnu/4.6.0/../../../../include/c++/4.6.0/bits/gslice.h:
In constructor ‘std::gslice::gslice()’:
/home/gramoli/velox/gcc-tm-install/lib/gcc/i686-pc-linux-gnu/4.6.0/../../../../include/c++/4.6.0/bits/gslice.h:148:35:
error: call to function ‘void* operator new(unsigned int)’ which throws
incomplete type ‘struct std::bad_alloc’
/home/gramoli/velox/gcc-tm-install/lib/gcc/i686-pc-linux-gnu/4.6.0/../../../../include/c++/4.6.0/bits/gslice.h:
In constructor ‘std::gslice::gslice(size_t, const std::valarray<unsigned int>&,
const std::valarray<unsigned int>&)’:
/home/gramoli/velox/gcc-tm-install/lib/gcc/i686-pc-linux-gnu/4.6.0/../../../../include/c++/4.6.0/bits/gslice.h:153:48:
error: call to function ‘void* operator new(unsigned int)’ which throws
incomplete type ‘struct std::bad_alloc’

[Bug c++/45940] [trans-mem] Error of unsafe function even if annotated

[aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45940

--- Comment #14 from Aldy Hernandez <aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org> 2011-01-20 14:30:50 UTC ---
Vincent, this is bug 47340.  I will be looking at this today.

[Bug c++/45940] [trans-mem] Error of unsafe function even if annotated

[vincent.gramoli at epfl dot ch]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45940

--- Comment #15 from Vincent Gramoli <vincent.gramoli at epfl dot ch> 2011-01-20 15:14:21 UTC ---
Thanks!

Vincent


On Jan 20, 2011, at 3:31 PM, aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:

> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45940
> 
> --- Comment #14 from Aldy Hernandez <aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org> 2011-01-20 14:30:50 UTC ---
> Vincent, this is bug 47340.  I will be looking at this today.
> 
> -- 
> Configure bugmail: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
> ------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
> You reported the bug.

[Bug c++/45940] [trans-mem] Error of unsafe function even if annotated

[vincent.gramoli at epfl dot ch]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45940

--- Comment #16 from Vincent Gramoli <vincent.gramoli at epfl dot ch> 2011-01-24 12:04:37 UTC ---
Hi Aldy, 
The bug does you refer to does not seem to be assigned to anyone.

Vincent

On Jan 20, 2011, at 3:31 PM, aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:

> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45940
> 
> --- Comment #14 from Aldy Hernandez <aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org> 2011-01-20 14:30:50 UTC ---
> Vincent, this is bug 47340.  I will be looking at this today.
> 
> -- 
> Configure bugmail: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
> ------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
> You reported the bug.