public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "joseph at codesourcery dot com" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug c/64843] miscompilation of atomic_fetch_add on atomic pointer type
Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2015 23:20:00 -0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <bug-64843-4-XCi8EDc2c6@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <bug-64843-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64843

--- Comment #3 from joseph at codesourcery dot com <joseph at codesourcery dot com> ---
The first question is whether this code is actually valid.  C11 says "All 
of these operations are applicable to an object of any atomic integer 
type.", not mentioning pointer types as valid, but then refers to address 
types.

Then, if it's valid to use pointer types here, something like the 
following (untested, and all four of the _add and _sub macros would need 
similar changes) should work without changing the built-in function 
semantics:

/* EXPR1 if it has a pointer type, otherwise EXPR2.  */
#define __atomic_ptr_choose(EXPR1, EXPR2) \
  __builtin_choose_expr (__builtin_classify_type (EXPR1) == 5, \
             (EXPR1), (EXPR2))

/* The size of *EXPR if EXPR has a pointer type, 1 otherwise.  */
#define __atomic_ptr_size(EXPR) \
  ((__PTRDIFF_TYPE__) \
   sizeof (*(__typeof (__atomic_ptr_choose (EXPR, (char *) 0))) 0))

#define atomic_fetch_add(PTR, VAL) \
  __extension__ \
  ({ \
    __auto_type __atomic_fetch_add_ptr = (PTR); \
    __atomic_fetch_add (__atomic_fetch_add_ptr, \
            (VAL) * __atomic_ptr_size (*__atomic_fetch_add_ptr), \
            __ATOMIC_SEQ_CST); \
  })


  parent reply	other threads:[~2015-01-28 23:20 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2015-01-28 19:38 [Bug c/64843] New: " richard-gccbugzilla at metafoo dot co.uk
2015-01-28 20:38 ` [Bug c/64843] " rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2015-01-28 21:44 ` richard-gccbugzilla at metafoo dot co.uk
2015-01-28 23:20 ` joseph at codesourcery dot com [this message]
2015-01-28 23:24 ` joseph at codesourcery dot com
2015-01-29  0:05 ` richard-gccbugzilla at metafoo dot co.uk
2015-01-29  1:04 ` redi 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-64843-4-XCi8EDc2c6@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).