From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: by sourceware.org (Postfix, from userid 48)
	id 3DD603858404; Wed, 25 Oct 2023 13:03:44 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 3DD603858404
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gcc.gnu.org;
	s=default; t=1698239024;
	bh=TIuhILdywljKvVg8pEGJf0+yZkttMzRQbHZtWC2ZFA8=;
	h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From;
	b=EaGnCIx4mDeKciSFADHs1jxjgo6IGKfIT4hKl1zuz9Zy8JpLDTSKrASwNbvhLhvfZ
	 +BkJ31YY8OJP4HzRfrHZX/Kth7/T2B9rye68Nd6Tzlhuu9jAE47Mhd4KCm66YaVpkL
	 ibD1c4NDIu0ux+cH/mOpQvRl+gqv9epY8mpHkhUo=
From: "muecker at gwdg dot de" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug ipa/96503] attribute alloc_size effect lost after inlining
Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2023 13:03:43 +0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: ipa
X-Bugzilla-Version: 11.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: diagnostic
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: muecker at gwdg dot de
X-Bugzilla-Status: UNCONFIRMED
X-Bugzilla-Resolution: 
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: ---
X-Bugzilla-Flags: 
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: 
Message-ID: <bug-96503-4-dclRA14l15@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-96503-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-96503-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Bugzilla-URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
MIME-Version: 1.0
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.sourceware.org>

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D96503

--- Comment #7 from Martin Uecker <muecker at gwdg dot de> ---
Am Mittwoch, dem 25.10.2023 um 11:08 +0000 schrieb siddhesh at gcc dot gnu.=
org:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D96503
>=20
> --- Comment #6 from Siddhesh Poyarekar <siddhesh at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
> So basically,
>=20
>   __builtin_with_access(void *ptr, size_t size, int access)
>=20
> where access =3D=3D
>=20
> -1: Unknown access semantics
> 0: none
> 1: read_only
> 2: write_only
> 3: read_write
>=20
> should address both access and alloc_size and even counted_by. =C2=A0

Yes, sounds good.

> We would need
> to emit the builtin in the caller as well as callee of the function that =
has
> the access attribute while for alloc_size, we only need to emit this in t=
he
> caller.

Yes, makes sense, although I guess caller part for "access"
is only for warning and not relevant for BDOS, so could=C2=A0
potentially stay as it is for now.

For __builtin_with_access we probably only want to allow
reducing the object size, while the 'extend_size' workaround=C2=A0
used by systemd (cf comment #4) would need to extend it.=C2=A0
Maybe we need another flag?

Martin=