public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "arnej at pvv dot ntnu.no" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug c++/49115] New: invalid return value optimization (?) when exception is thrown and caught
Date: Sun, 22 May 2011 20:10:00 -0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <bug-49115-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> (raw)

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49115

           Summary: invalid return value optimization (?) when exception
                    is thrown and caught
           Product: gcc
           Version: unknown
            Status: UNCONFIRMED
          Severity: normal
          Priority: P3
         Component: c++
        AssignedTo: unassigned@gcc.gnu.org
        ReportedBy: arnej@pvv.ntnu.no


we have some code that started failing when I tried upgrading our tool chain to
GCC 4.5.2; it gets stale data in an object when an exception is thrown during
assignment.

It looks to me like return value optimization will cause the object constructor
to be optimized away, but I'm not totally certain if that is the actual
problem, nor what the C++ language guarantees in this situation.

A self-contained test program is below, failing for me on x86_64 using:

GNU C++ (GCC) version 4.5.2 (x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu)
    compiled by GNU C version 4.5.2, GMP version 4.3.2, MPFR version 3.0.1, MPC
version 0.9

----- test program follows -----

extern "C" { extern long write(int, const void *, unsigned long); }

struct MyException {};
int simfail = 7;

struct Data {
    int nr;
    Data() : nr(66) {}
};

Data getData(int i) {
    if (simfail == i) throw MyException();
    Data data;
    data.nr = i;
    return data;
}

bool verify() {
    char bad[7] = "BAD x\n";
    for (int i = 0; i < 10; i++) {
        Data data;
        try {
            data = getData(i);
        } catch (MyException& e) {
            if (data.nr != 66) {
                bad[4] = '0' + data.nr;
                write(2, bad, 6);
                return false;
            }
        }
    }
    return true;
}

int main(int, char **) {
    simfail = 4;
    return verify() ? 0 : 1;
}


             reply	other threads:[~2011-05-22 20:05 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2011-05-22 20:10 arnej at pvv dot ntnu.no [this message]
2011-05-22 20:56 ` [Bug tree-optimization/49115] " rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2011-05-23 12:37 ` [Bug tree-optimization/49115] [4.5/4.6 Regression] " rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2011-05-23 13:00 ` [Bug tree-optimization/49115] " rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2011-06-12 13:44 ` [Bug tree-optimization/49115] [4.5/4.6 Regression] " rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2011-06-17 11:27 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2011-07-04 13:25 ` [Bug tree-optimization/49115] [4.5 " rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2011-07-04 13:26 ` 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-49115-4@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).