public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "jakub at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug c++/99934] bad_array_new_length thrown when non-throwing allocation function would have been used
Date: Tue, 06 Apr 2021 12:41:34 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <bug-99934-4-2ALdgvChHh@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <bug-99934-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99934

--- Comment #1 from Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
For the non-global replaceable operator new call, we put the outer_nelts_check
already into the size argument before we actually look up the call:
      tree errval = TYPE_MAX_VALUE (sizetype);
      if (cxx_dialect >= cxx11 && flag_exceptions)
        errval = throw_bad_array_new_length ();
      if (outer_nelts_check != NULL_TREE)
        size = fold_build3 (COND_EXPR, sizetype, outer_nelts_check,
                            size, errval);
...
          alloc_call
            = build_new_method_call (dummy, fns, &align_args,
                                     /*conversion_path=*/NULL_TREE,
                                     LOOKUP_NORMAL, &alloc_fn, tf_none);
...
        alloc_call = build_new_method_call (dummy, fns, placement,
                                            /*conversion_path=*/NULL_TREE,
                                            LOOKUP_NORMAL,
                                            &alloc_fn, complain);
So I guess either we should after alloc_call is built look whether it is
noexcept/throw() and if so, wrap it into another COND_EXPR with unshare_expr of
outer_nelts_check and alloc_call, build_zero_cst (TREE_TYPE (alloc_call)),
or perhaps that + at that point try to simplify the size argument of the call.
But I think any kind of CSE in GIMPLE or RTL optimizations should optimize that
already and so the FE doesn't need to duplicate such optimization.

Plus verify what happens with the global replaceable operators.

And another thing is constant expression evaluation,
http://eel.is/c++draft/expr.new#9.5 says we should reject it during constant
expression evaluation, but if we represent it as
COND_EXPR something, operator new (...), nullptr
then I'm afraid constant expression evaluation would accept it and evaluate to
nullptr.

  reply	other threads:[~2021-04-06 12:41 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2021-04-06 11:33 [Bug c++/99934] New: " redi at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-04-06 12:41 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org [this message]
2022-03-28  9:17 ` [Bug c++/99934] " redi at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-03-20  9:52 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-03-20 10:08 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-03-20 10:23 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org
2024-04-22 16:14 ` 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-99934-4-2ALdgvChHh@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).