public inbox for gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Jakub Jelinek <jakub@redhat.com>
To: Richard Biener <rguenther@suse.de>
Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [PATCH] operand_equal_p checking (PR sanitizer/70683)
Date: Tue, 26 Apr 2016 22:51:00 -0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160426225139.GZ26501@tucnak.zalov.cz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20160426130238.GU26501@tucnak.zalov.cz>

On Tue, Apr 26, 2016 at 03:02:38PM +0200, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> The debugging hack is too ugly and slows down the compiler (by artificially
> increasing number of collisions), so it is not appropriate, but perhaps we
> can add some internal only use OEP_* flag, pass it to the recursive calls
> of operand_equal_p and if not set and flag_checking, verify
> iterative_hash_expr equality in the outermost call).

Here is the corresponding checking patch.  It uncovered two further issues
in the tree.[ch] patch which I'm going to post momentarily.
Both patches together bootstrapped/regtested on x86_64-linux and i686-linux,
ok for trunk?

2016-04-27  Jakub Jelinek  <jakub@redhat.com>

	PR sanitizer/70683
	* tree-core.h (enum operand_equal_flag): Add OEP_NO_HASH_CHECK.
	* fold-const.c (operand_equal_p): If flag_checking and
	OEP_NO_HASH_CHECK is not set in flag, recurse with OEP_NO_HASH_CHECK
	and if it returns non-zero, assert iterative_hash_expr on both
	args is the same.

--- gcc/tree-core.h.jj	2016-04-22 18:21:55.000000000 +0200
+++ gcc/tree-core.h	2016-04-26 17:47:19.875753297 +0200
@@ -765,7 +765,9 @@ enum operand_equal_flag {
   OEP_ONLY_CONST = 1,
   OEP_PURE_SAME = 2,
   OEP_MATCH_SIDE_EFFECTS = 4,
-  OEP_ADDRESS_OF = 8
+  OEP_ADDRESS_OF = 8,
+  /* Internal within operand_equal_p:  */
+  OEP_NO_HASH_CHECK = 16
 };
 
 /* Enum and arrays used for tree allocation stats.
--- gcc/fold-const.c.jj	2016-04-22 18:21:32.000000000 +0200
+++ gcc/fold-const.c	2016-04-26 18:30:40.919080701 +0200
@@ -2749,6 +2749,25 @@ combine_comparisons (location_t loc,
 int
 operand_equal_p (const_tree arg0, const_tree arg1, unsigned int flags)
 {
+  /* When checking, verify at the outermost operand_equal_p call that
+     if operand_equal_p returns non-zero then ARG0 and ARG1 has the same
+     hash value.  */
+  if (flag_checking && !(flags & OEP_NO_HASH_CHECK))
+    {
+      if (operand_equal_p (arg0, arg1, flags | OEP_NO_HASH_CHECK))
+	{
+	  inchash::hash hstate0 (0), hstate1 (0);
+	  inchash::add_expr (arg0, hstate0, flags);
+	  inchash::add_expr (arg1, hstate1, flags);
+	  hashval_t h0 = hstate0.end ();
+	  hashval_t h1 = hstate1.end ();
+	  gcc_assert (h0 == h1);
+	  return 1;
+	}
+      else
+	return 0;
+    }
+
   /* If either is ERROR_MARK, they aren't equal.  */
   if (TREE_CODE (arg0) == ERROR_MARK || TREE_CODE (arg1) == ERROR_MARK
       || TREE_TYPE (arg0) == error_mark_node


	Jakub

  reply	other threads:[~2016-04-26 22:51 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2016-04-26 13:02 [PATCH] Fix up inchash::add_expr to match more closely operand_equal_p " Jakub Jelinek
2016-04-26 22:51 ` Jakub Jelinek [this message]
2016-04-27 12:41   ` [PATCH] operand_equal_p checking " Richard Biener
2016-04-28  8:59     ` Christophe Lyon
2016-04-26 23:00 ` [PATCH] Fix up inchash::add_expr to match more closely operand_equal_p (PR sanitizer/70683, take 2) Jakub Jelinek
2016-04-27  7:41   ` Richard Biener

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=20160426225139.GZ26501@tucnak.zalov.cz \
    --to=jakub@redhat.com \
    --cc=gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org \
    --cc=rguenther@suse.de \
    /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).