* HELP: one issue during the implementation for counted_by attribute
@ 2023-11-30 16:07 Qing Zhao
2023-12-06 15:19 ` Qing Zhao
0 siblings, 1 reply; 2+ messages in thread
From: Qing Zhao @ 2023-11-30 16:07 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Joseph Myers, Martin Uecker, Richard Biener, Jakub Jelinek
Cc: siddhesh Poyarekar, gcc Patches
Hi,
1. For the following source code (portion):
struct annotated {
size_t foo;
char b;
char array[] __attribute__((counted_by (foo)));
};
static void noinline bar ()
{
struct annotated *p2 = alloc_buf (10);
p2->array[8] = 0;
return;
}
2. I modified C FE to generate the following code for the routine “bar”:
;; Function bar (null)
;; enabled by -tree-original
{
struct annotated * p2 = alloc_buf (10);
struct annotated * p2 = alloc_buf (10);
.ACCESS_WITH_SIZE ((char *) &p2->array, &p2->foo, 1, 8, -1)[8] = 0;
return;
}
The gimpliflication asserted at:/home/opc/Install/latest-d/bin/gcc -O2 -fdump-tree-all ttt_1.c
ttt_1.c: In function ‘bar’:
ttt_1.c:29:5: internal compiler error: in create_tmp_var, at gimple-expr.cc:488
29 | p2->array[8] = 0;
| ~~^~~~~~~
3. The reason for this assertion failure is: (in gcc/gimplify.cc)
16686 case CALL_EXPR:
16687 ret = gimplify_call_expr (expr_p, pre_p, fallback != fb_none);
16688
16689 /* C99 code may assign to an array in a structure returned
16690 from a function, and this has undefined behavior only on
16691 execution, so create a temporary if an lvalue is
16692 required. */
16693 if (fallback == fb_lvalue)
16694 {
16695 *expr_p = get_initialized_tmp_var (*expr_p, pre_p, post_p, false);
16696 mark_addressable (*expr_p);
16697 ret = GS_OK;
16698 }
16699 break;
At Line 16695, when gimplifier tried to create a temporary value for the .ACCESS_WITH_SIZE function as:
tmp = .ACCESS_WITH_SIZE ((char *) &p2->array, &p2->foo, 1, 8, -1);
It asserted since the TYPE of the function .ACCESS_WITH_SIZE is an INCOMPLETE_TYPE (it’s the TYPE of p2->array, which is an incomplete type).
4. I am stuck on how to resolve this issue properly:
The first question is:
Where should we generate
tmp = .ACCESS_WITH_SIZE ((char *) &p2->array, &p2->foo, 1, 8, -1)
In C FE or in middle-end gimplification?
Thanks a lot for your help.
Qing
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 2+ messages in thread
* Re: HELP: one issue during the implementation for counted_by attribute
2023-11-30 16:07 HELP: one issue during the implementation for counted_by attribute Qing Zhao
@ 2023-12-06 15:19 ` Qing Zhao
0 siblings, 0 replies; 2+ messages in thread
From: Qing Zhao @ 2023-12-06 15:19 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Joseph Myers, Martin Uecker, Richard Biener, Jakub Jelinek
Cc: siddhesh Poyarekar, gcc Patches
Just an update on this issue.
Finally, I resolved this issue with the following solution:
For the source code (portion):
"
struct annotated {
size_t foo;
char array[] __attribute__((counted_by (foo)));
};
p2->array[8] = 0;
“
C FE will generate the following: (*.005t.original)
*(.ACCESS_WITH_SIZE (p2->array, &p2->foo, 1, 8, -1) + 8) = 0;
i.e, the RETURN type of the call to .ACCESS_WITH_SIZE should be a pointer type to char, char *
(Previously, the RETURN type of the call is char [])"
This resolved the issue nicely.
Let me know if you see any obvious issue with this solution.
thanks.
Qing
> On Nov 30, 2023, at 11:07 AM, Qing Zhao <qing.zhao@oracle.com> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> 1. For the following source code (portion):
>
> struct annotated {
> size_t foo;
> char b;
> char array[] __attribute__((counted_by (foo)));
> };
>
> static void noinline bar ()
> {
> struct annotated *p2 = alloc_buf (10);
> p2->array[8] = 0;
> return;
> }
>
> 2. I modified C FE to generate the following code for the routine “bar”:
>
> ;; Function bar (null)
> ;; enabled by -tree-original
> {
> struct annotated * p2 = alloc_buf (10);
>
> struct annotated * p2 = alloc_buf (10);
> .ACCESS_WITH_SIZE ((char *) &p2->array, &p2->foo, 1, 8, -1)[8] = 0;
> return;
> }
>
> The gimpliflication asserted at:/home/opc/Install/latest-d/bin/gcc -O2 -fdump-tree-all ttt_1.c
> ttt_1.c: In function ‘bar’:
> ttt_1.c:29:5: internal compiler error: in create_tmp_var, at gimple-expr.cc:488
> 29 | p2->array[8] = 0;
> | ~~^~~~~~~
>
> 3. The reason for this assertion failure is: (in gcc/gimplify.cc)
>
> 16686 case CALL_EXPR:
> 16687 ret = gimplify_call_expr (expr_p, pre_p, fallback != fb_none);
> 16688
> 16689 /* C99 code may assign to an array in a structure returned
> 16690 from a function, and this has undefined behavior only on
> 16691 execution, so create a temporary if an lvalue is
> 16692 required. */
> 16693 if (fallback == fb_lvalue)
> 16694 {
> 16695 *expr_p = get_initialized_tmp_var (*expr_p, pre_p, post_p, false);
> 16696 mark_addressable (*expr_p);
> 16697 ret = GS_OK;
> 16698 }
> 16699 break;
>
> At Line 16695, when gimplifier tried to create a temporary value for the .ACCESS_WITH_SIZE function as:
> tmp = .ACCESS_WITH_SIZE ((char *) &p2->array, &p2->foo, 1, 8, -1);
>
> It asserted since the TYPE of the function .ACCESS_WITH_SIZE is an INCOMPLETE_TYPE (it’s the TYPE of p2->array, which is an incomplete type).
>
> 4. I am stuck on how to resolve this issue properly:
> The first question is:
>
> Where should we generate
> tmp = .ACCESS_WITH_SIZE ((char *) &p2->array, &p2->foo, 1, 8, -1)
>
> In C FE or in middle-end gimplification?
>
> Thanks a lot for your help.
>
> Qing
>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 2+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2023-12-06 15:19 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2023-11-30 16:07 HELP: one issue during the implementation for counted_by attribute Qing Zhao
2023-12-06 15:19 ` Qing Zhao
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).