From: Lewis Hyatt <lhyatt@gmail.com>
To: David Malcolm <dmalcolm@redhat.com>
Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 4/8] diagnostics: Support obtaining source code lines from generated data buffers
Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2023 15:41:59 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20230823194159.GA65951@ldh-imac.local> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAA_5UQ5P+kW-AjsZvfHbkFGwwcVhpbXSSz7gYxmp7r6wHi_iuA@mail.gmail.com>
On Tue, Aug 15, 2023 at 04:08:47PM -0400, Lewis Hyatt wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 15, 2023 at 3:46 PM David Malcolm <dmalcolm@redhat.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, 2023-08-15 at 14:15 -0400, Lewis Hyatt wrote:
> > > On Tue, Aug 15, 2023 at 12:15:15PM -0400, David Malcolm wrote:
> > > > On Wed, 2023-08-09 at 18:14 -0400, Lewis Hyatt wrote:
> > > > > This patch enhances location_get_source_line(), which is the
> > > > > primary
> > > > > interface provided by the diagnostics infrastructure to obtain
> > > > > the line of
> > > > > source code corresponding to a given location, so that it
> > > > > understands
> > > > > generated data locations in addition to normal file-based
> > > > > locations. This
> > > > > involves changing the argument to location_get_source_line() from
> > > > > a plain
> > > > > file name, to a source_id object that can represent either type
> > > > > of location.
> > > > >
> >
> > [...]
> >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > diff --git a/gcc/input.cc b/gcc/input.cc
> > > > > index 9377020b460..790279d4273 100644
> > > > > --- a/gcc/input.cc
> > > > > +++ b/gcc/input.cc
> > > > > @@ -207,6 +207,28 @@ private:
> > > > > void maybe_grow ();
> > > > > };
> > > > >
> > > > > +/* This is the implementation of cache_data_source for generated
> > > > > + data that is already in memory. */
> > > > > +class data_cache_slot final : public cache_data_source
> > > >
> > > > It occurred to me: why are we caching accessing a buffer that's
> > > > already
> > > > in memory - but we're also caching the line-splitting information,
> > > > and
> > > > providing the line-splitting algorithm with a consistent interface
> > > > to
> > > > the data, right?
> > > >
> > >
> > > Yeah, for the current _Pragma use case, multi-line buffers are not
> > > going to
> > > be common, but they can occur. I was mainly motivated by the
> > > consistent
> > > interface, and by the assumption that the overhead is not critical
> > > given a
> > > diagnostic is being issued.
> >
> > (nods)
> >
> > >
> > > > [...snip...]
> > > >
> > > > > @@ -397,6 +434,15 @@ diagnostics_file_cache_forcibly_evict_file
> > > > > (const char *file_path)
> > > > > global_dc->m_file_cache->forcibly_evict_file (file_path);
> > > > > }
> > > > >
> > > > > +void
> > > > > +diagnostics_file_cache_forcibly_evict_data (const char *data,
> > > > > + unsigned int
> > > > > data_len)
> > > > > +{
> > > > > + if (!global_dc->m_file_cache)
> > > > > + return;
> > > > > + global_dc->m_file_cache->forcibly_evict_data (data, data_len);
> > > >
> > > > Maybe we should rename diagnostic_context's m_file_cache to
> > > > m_source_cache? (and class file_cache for that matter?) But if
> > > > so,
> > > > that can/should be a followup/separate patch.
> > > >
> > >
> > > Yes, we should. Believe it or not, I was trying to minimize the size
> > > of the
> > > patch :)
> >
> > :)
> >
> > Thanks for splitting it up, BTW.
> >
> > [...]
> >
> >
> > > >
> > > > > @@ -912,26 +1000,22 @@ cache_data_source::read_line_num (size_t
> > > > > line_num,
> > > > > If the function fails, a NULL char_span is returned. */
> > > > >
> > > > > char_span
> > > > > -location_get_source_line (const char *file_path, int line)
> > > > > +location_get_source_line (source_id src, int line)
> > > > > {
> > > > > - const char *buffer = NULL;
> > > > > - ssize_t len;
> > > > > -
> > > > > - if (line == 0)
> > > > > - return char_span (NULL, 0);
> > > > > -
> > > > > - if (file_path == NULL)
> > > > > - return char_span (NULL, 0);
> > > > > + const char_span fail (nullptr, 0);
> > > > > + if (!src || line <= 0)
> > > > > + return fail;
> > > >
> > > > Looking at source_id's operator bool, are there effectively three
> > > > kinds
> > > > of source_id?
> > > >
> > > > (a) file names
> > > > (b) generated buffer
> > > > (c) NULL == m_filename_or_buffer
> > > >
> > > > What does (c) mean? Is it a "something's gone wrong/error" state?
> > > > Or
> > > > is this more a special-case of (a)? (in that the m_len for such a
> > > > case
> > > > would be zero)
> > > >
> > > > Should source_id's 2-param ctor have an assert that the ptr is non-
> > > > NULL?
> > > >
> > > > [...snip...]
> > > >
> > > > The patch is OK for trunk as-is, but note the question about the
> > > > source_id ctor above.
> > > >
> > >
> > > Thanks. (c) has the same meaning as a NULL file name currently does,
> > > so a
> > > default-constructed source_id is not an in-memory buffer, but is
> > > rather a
> > > NULL filename. linemap_add() for instance, will interpret a NULL
> > > filename
> > > for an LC_LEAVE map, as a request to copy it from the natural values
> > > being
> > > returned to. I think the source_id constructor needs to accept a NULL
> > > filename to remain backwards compatible. With the current design of
> > > source_id, it is safe always to change a 'const char*' file name
> > > argument to
> > > a source_id argument instead; it will work just how it did before
> > > because it
> > > has an implicit constructor. But if the constructor would assert on a
> > > non-NULL pointer, that would necessitate changing all call sites that
> > > currently expect they can pass a NULL pointer there. (For example,
> > > there are
> > > several calls to _cpp_do_file_change() within libcpp that take
> > > advantage of
> > > being able to pass a NULL filename to linemap_add.)
> >
> > Yes, it's OK for this ctor to accept NULL;
> > source_id (const char *filename = nullptr)
> > and I see you added the default arg.
> >
> > I was referring to this ctor:
> > source_id (const char *buffer, unsigned buffer_len)
> > Is it ever OK for "buffer" to be NULL in this 2-param ctor, or can we
> > assert that it's non-NULL in this ctor? Does the generated data case
> > ever return NULL?
> >
>
> Oh, I see. This should never be NULL and I can add an assert for that.
>
This tweak (incremental to patch 1/8) accomplishes that.
-Lewis
-- >8 --
diff --git a/libcpp/include/line-map.h b/libcpp/include/line-map.h
index 395c4612dbe..ad20b140cce 100644
--- a/libcpp/include/line-map.h
+++ b/libcpp/include/line-map.h
@@ -604,7 +604,7 @@ public:
: m_filename_or_buffer (buffer),
m_len (buffer_len)
{
- linemap_assert (buffer_len > 0);
+ linemap_assert (buffer && buffer_len > 0);
}
explicit operator bool () const { return m_filename_or_buffer; }
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-08-23 19:42 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 36+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-07-21 23:08 [PATCH v3 0/4] diagnostics: libcpp: Overhaul locations for _Pragma tokens Lewis Hyatt
2023-07-21 23:08 ` [PATCH v3 1/4] diagnostics: libcpp: Add LC_GEN linemaps to support in-memory buffers Lewis Hyatt
2023-07-28 22:58 ` David Malcolm
2023-07-31 22:39 ` Lewis Hyatt
2023-08-09 22:14 ` [PATCH v4 0/8] diagnostics: libcpp: Overhaul locations for _Pragma tokens Lewis Hyatt
2023-08-09 22:14 ` [PATCH v4 1/8] libcpp: Add LC_GEN linemaps to support in-memory buffers Lewis Hyatt
2023-08-11 22:45 ` David Malcolm
2023-08-13 20:18 ` Lewis Hyatt
2023-08-09 22:14 ` [PATCH v4 2/8] libcpp: diagnostics: Support generated data in expanded locations Lewis Hyatt
2023-08-11 23:02 ` David Malcolm
2023-08-14 21:41 ` Lewis Hyatt
2023-08-09 22:14 ` [PATCH v4 3/8] diagnostics: Refactor class file_cache_slot Lewis Hyatt
2023-08-15 15:43 ` David Malcolm
2023-08-15 17:58 ` Lewis Hyatt
2023-08-15 19:39 ` David Malcolm
2023-08-23 21:22 ` Lewis Hyatt
2023-08-09 22:14 ` [PATCH v4 4/8] diagnostics: Support obtaining source code lines from generated data buffers Lewis Hyatt
2023-08-15 16:15 ` David Malcolm
2023-08-15 18:15 ` Lewis Hyatt
2023-08-15 19:46 ` David Malcolm
2023-08-15 20:08 ` Lewis Hyatt
2023-08-23 19:41 ` Lewis Hyatt [this message]
2023-08-09 22:14 ` [PATCH v4 5/8] diagnostics: Support testing generated data in input.cc selftests Lewis Hyatt
2023-08-15 16:27 ` David Malcolm
2023-08-09 22:14 ` [PATCH v4 6/8] diagnostics: Full support for generated data locations Lewis Hyatt
2023-08-15 16:39 ` David Malcolm
2023-08-09 22:14 ` [PATCH v4 7/8] diagnostics: libcpp: Assign real locations to the tokens inside _Pragma strings Lewis Hyatt
2023-08-09 22:14 ` [PATCH v4 8/8] diagnostics: Support generated data locations in SARIF output Lewis Hyatt
2023-08-15 17:04 ` David Malcolm
2023-08-15 17:51 ` Lewis Hyatt
2023-07-21 23:08 ` [PATCH v3 2/4] diagnostics: Handle generated data locations in edit_context Lewis Hyatt
2023-07-21 23:08 ` [PATCH v3 3/4] diagnostics: libcpp: Assign real locations to the tokens inside _Pragma strings Lewis Hyatt
2023-07-21 23:08 ` [PATCH v3 4/4] diagnostics: Support generated data locations in SARIF output Lewis Hyatt
2023-07-28 22:22 ` [PATCH v3 0/4] diagnostics: libcpp: Overhaul locations for _Pragma tokens David Malcolm
2023-07-29 14:27 ` Lewis Hyatt
2023-07-29 16:03 ` David Malcolm
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=20230823194159.GA65951@ldh-imac.local \
--to=lhyatt@gmail.com \
--cc=dmalcolm@redhat.com \
--cc=gcc-patches@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).