public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "msebor at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug tree-optimization/97185] inconsistent builtin elimination for impossible range
Date: Tue, 14 Jun 2022 17:37:09 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <bug-97185-4-3wvKfetVc8@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <bug-97185-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97185

--- Comment #2 from Martin Sebor <msebor at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
There's a heuristic for ranges of allocation sizes to exclude zero
(size_range_flags) that comes into play here.  The actual range isn't
"impossible" in the sense it's necessarily invalid.  It just means the string
function call is either a no-op or out of bounds, and so can be eliminated as
an optimization.  With the optimization consistently implemented the warning
will also go away (eliminating the calls will prevent sanitizers from detecting
the out of bounds ones, so that might be a consideration).

In general, a low > high range denoted an anti-range before Ranger was
introduced (i.e., ~[high, low]).  With Ranger it's the corresponding union of
two ranges.  Some of the cruft for dealing with anti-ranges is still around,
such as in get_size_range() in pointer-query.cc.  The code should be migrated
to the irange class and the representation probably also updated to print
something more sensible (e.g., the union [MIN, high) U (low, MAX]; we talked
about introducing a pretty-printer % directive for ranges to make the format
consistent across all diagnostics).

  parent reply	other threads:[~2022-06-14 17:37 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2020-09-23 20:18 [Bug tree-optimization/97185] New: " msebor at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-06-14  8:24 ` [Bug tree-optimization/97185] " siddhesh at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-06-14 17:37 ` msebor at gcc dot gnu.org [this message]
2022-06-15  8:32 ` siddhesh 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-97185-4-3wvKfetVc8@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).