public inbox for gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Qing Zhao <qing.zhao@oracle.com>
To: Richard Biener <rguenther@suse.de>
Cc: Jakub Jelinek <jakub@redhat.com>,
	Nick Alcock via Gcc-patches <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>,
	Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>
Subject: Re: [patch][version 6] add -ftrivial-auto-var-init and variable attribute "uninitialized" to gcc
Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2021 22:45:57 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <3D282310-784B-4CD8-92FB-4A6A613894C4@oracle.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <517EA40B-9500-4090-8F03-B4A9CECC62F8@oracle.com>

Hi,
Although I kept my previous "use_register_for_decl(lhs)” to decide “memset” expansion or “assign” expansion when expanding .DEFERRED_INIT 

When generating “pattern” for “assign” expansion, I found that “can_native_interpret_type_p(var_type)”  combined with “native_interpret_expr” make
the implementation cleaner and simpler as following:

      if (init_type == AUTO_INIT_PATTERN)
        {
          if (can_native_interpret_type_p (var_type))
            {
              unsigned char *buf = (unsigned char *) xmalloc (total_bytes);
              memset (buf, INIT_PATTERN_VALUE, total_bytes);
              pattern = native_interpret_expr (var_type, buf, total_bytes);
              gcc_assert (pattern);
            }
          else
            {
              tree index_type = build_index_type (size_int (total_bytes - 1));
              tree array_type = build_array_type (unsigned_char_type_node,
                                                  index_type);
              tree element = build_int_cst (unsigned_char_type_node,
                                            INIT_PATTERN_VALUE);
              vec<constructor_elt, va_gc> *elts = NULL;
              for (unsigned int i = 0; i < total_bytes; i++)
                CONSTRUCTOR_APPEND_ELT (elts, NULL_TREE, element);
              pattern = build_constructor (array_type, elts);
              pattern = build1 (VIEW_CONVERT_EXPR, var_type, pattern);
            }
        }

Thanks.

Qing

On Aug 12, 2021, at 2:24 PM, Qing Zhao via Gcc-patches <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org> wrote:
> 
> 
> Hi, Richard,
> 
> For RTL expansion of call to .DEFERRED_INIT, I changed my code per your suggestions like following:
> 
> ======================
> #define INIT_PATTERN_VALUE  0xFE
> static void
> expand_DEFERRED_INIT (internal_fn, gcall *stmt)
> {
>  tree lhs = gimple_call_lhs (stmt);
>  tree var_size = gimple_call_arg (stmt, 0);
>  enum auto_init_type init_type
>    = (enum auto_init_type) TREE_INT_CST_LOW (gimple_call_arg (stmt, 1));
>  bool is_vla = (bool) TREE_INT_CST_LOW (gimple_call_arg (stmt, 2));
> 
>  tree var_type = TREE_TYPE (lhs);
>  gcc_assert (init_type > AUTO_INIT_UNINITIALIZED);
> 
>  if (is_vla || (!can_native_interpret_type_p (var_type)))
>    {
>    /* If this is a VLA or the type of the variable cannot be natively
>       interpreted, expand to a memset to initialize it.  */
>      if (TREE_CODE (lhs) == SSA_NAME)
>        lhs = SSA_NAME_VAR (lhs);
>      tree var_addr = NULL_TREE;
>      if (is_vla)
>        var_addr = TREE_OPERAND (lhs, 0);
>      else
>        {
>         TREE_ADDRESSABLE (lhs) = 1;
>         var_addr = build_fold_addr_expr (lhs);
>        }
>      tree value = (init_type == AUTO_INIT_PATTERN) ?
>                    build_int_cst (unsigned_char_type_node,
>                                   INIT_PATTERN_VALUE) :
>                    build_zero_cst (unsigned_char_type_node);
>      tree m_call = build_call_expr (builtin_decl_implicit (BUILT_IN_MEMSET),
>                                     3, var_addr, value, var_size);
>      /* Expand this memset call.  */
>      expand_builtin_memset (m_call, NULL_RTX, TYPE_MODE (var_type));
>    }
>  else
>    {
>    /* If this is not a VLA and the type of the variable can be natively 
>       interpreted, expand to assignment to generate better code.  */
>      tree pattern = NULL_TREE;
>      unsigned HOST_WIDE_INT total_bytes
>        = tree_to_uhwi (TYPE_SIZE_UNIT (var_type));
> 
>      if (init_type == AUTO_INIT_PATTERN)
>        {
>          unsigned char *buf = (unsigned char *) xmalloc (total_bytes);
>          memset (buf, INIT_PATTERN_VALUE, total_bytes);
>          pattern = native_interpret_expr (var_type, buf, total_bytes);
>          gcc_assert (pattern);
>        }
> 
>      tree init = (init_type == AUTO_INIT_PATTERN) ?
>                   pattern :
>                   build_zero_cst (var_type);
>      expand_assignment (lhs, init, false);
>    }
> }
> ===========================
> 
> Now, I used “can_native_interpret_type_p (var_type)” instead of “use_register_for_decl (lhs)” to decide 
> whether to use “memset” or use “assign” to expand this function.
> 
> However, this exposed an bug that is very hard to be addressed:
> 
> *******For the testing case: test suite/gcc.dg/uninit-I.c:
> 
> /* { dg-do compile } */
> /* { dg-options "-O2 -Wuninitialized" } */
> 
> int sys_msgctl (void)
> {
>  struct { int mode; } setbuf;
>  return setbuf.mode;  /* { dg-warning "'setbuf\.mode' is used" } */
> ==
> 
> ******the above auto var “setbuf” has “struct” type, which “can_native_interpret_type_p(var_type)” is false, therefore, 
> Expanding this .DEFERRED_INIT call went down the “memset” expansion route. 
> 
> However, this structure type can be fitted into a register, therefore cannot be taken address anymore at this stage, even though I tried:
> 
>         TREE_ADDRESSABLE (lhs) = 1;
>         var_addr = build_fold_addr_expr (lhs);
> 
> To create an address variable for it, the expansion still failed at expr.c: line 8412:
> during RTL pass: expand
> /home/opc/Work/GCC/latest-gcc/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/auto-init-uninit-I.c:6:24: internal compiler error: in expand_expr_addr_expr_1, at expr.c:8412
> 0xd04104 expand_expr_addr_expr_1
> 	../../latest-gcc/gcc/expr.c:8412
> 0xd04a95 expand_expr_addr_expr
> 	../../latest-gcc/gcc/expr.c:8525
> 0xd13592 expand_expr_real_1(tree_node*, rtx_def*, machine_mode, expand_modifier, rtx_def**, bool)
> 	../../latest-gcc/gcc/expr.c:11741
> 0xd05142 expand_expr_real(tree_node*, rtx_def*, machine_mode, expand_modifier, rtx_def**, bool)
> 	../../latest-gcc/gcc/expr.c:8713
> 0xaed1d3 expand_expr
> 	../../latest-gcc/gcc/expr.h:301
> 0xaf0d89 get_memory_rtx
> 	../../latest-gcc/gcc/builtins.c:1370
> 0xafb4fb expand_builtin_memset_args
> 	../../latest-gcc/gcc/builtins.c:4102
> 0xafacde expand_builtin_memset(tree_node*, rtx_def*, machine_mode)
> 	../../latest-gcc/gcc/builtins.c:3886
> 0xe97fb3 expand_DEFERRED_INIT
> 
> ******That’s the major reason why I chose “use_register_for_decl(lhs)” to decide “memset” expansion or “assign” expansion, “memset” expansion
> needs to take address of the variable, if the variable has been decided to fit into a register, then its address cannot taken anymore at this stage.
> 
> ******using “can_native_interpret_type_p” did make the “pattern” generation part much  cleaner and simpler, however, looks like it didn’t work correctly.
> 
> Based on this, I’d like to keep my previous implementation by using “use_register_for_decl” to decide whether to take “memset” expansion or “assign” expansion.
> Therefore, I might still need to keep the “UGLY”  implementation of generatting “pattern” constant for different types?
> 
> Let me know your opinion on this.
> 
> Thanks a lot for the help.
> 
> Qing
> 
> 
>> On Aug 9, 2021, at 9:09 AM, Richard Biener <rguenther@suse.de> wrote:
>> 
>> On Tue, 27 Jul 2021, Qing Zhao wrote:
>> 
>> +        created during gimplification phase.  Refer to gimplify_vla_decl
>> +        for details.  */
>> +      tree var_decl = (TREE_CODE (var) == SSA_NAME) ?
>> +                      SSA_NAME_VAR (var) : var;
>> +      gcc_assert (DECL_HAS_VALUE_EXPR_P (var_decl));
>> +      gcc_assert (TREE_CODE (DECL_VALUE_EXPR (var_decl)) == 
>> INDIRECT_REF);
>> +      /* Get the address of this vla variable.  */
>> +      vlaaddr = TREE_OPERAND (DECL_VALUE_EXPR (var_decl), 0);
>> 
>> err - isn't the address of the decl represented by the LHS 
>> regardless whether this is a VLA or not?  Looking at DECL_VALUE_EXPR
>> looks quite fragile since that's not sth data dependence honors.
>> It looks you only partly gimplify the build init here?  All
>> DECL_VALUE_EXPRs should have been resolved.
>> 
>> +  if (is_vla || (!use_register_for_decl (var)))
>> ...
>> +  else
>> +    {
>> +    /* If this variable is in a register, use expand_assignment might
>> +       generate better code.  */
>> 
>> you compute the patter initializer even when not needing it,
>> that's wasteful.  It's also quite ugly, IMHO you should
>> use can_native_interpret_type_p (var_type) and native_interpret
>> a char [] array initialized to the pattern and if
>> !can_native_interpret_type_p () go the memset route.


  reply	other threads:[~2021-08-12 22:46 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 60+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2021-07-27  3:26 Qing Zhao
2021-07-28 20:21 ` Kees Cook
2021-07-28 21:53   ` Qing Zhao
2021-08-09 14:09 ` Richard Biener
2021-08-09 16:38   ` Qing Zhao
2021-08-09 17:14     ` Richard Biener
2021-08-10  7:36     ` Richard Biener
2021-08-10 13:39       ` Qing Zhao
2021-08-10 14:16         ` Richard Biener
2021-08-10 15:02           ` Qing Zhao
2021-08-10 15:22             ` Richard Biener
2021-08-10 15:55               ` Qing Zhao
2021-08-10 20:16               ` Qing Zhao
2021-08-10 22:26                 ` Qing Zhao
2021-08-11  7:02                   ` Richard Biener
2021-08-11 13:33                     ` Qing Zhao
2021-08-11 13:37                       ` Richard Biener
2021-08-11 13:54                         ` Qing Zhao
2021-08-11 13:58                           ` Richard Biener
2021-08-11 14:00                             ` Qing Zhao
2021-08-11 15:30                             ` Qing Zhao
2021-08-11 15:53                               ` Richard Biener
2021-08-11 16:22                                 ` Qing Zhao
2021-08-11 16:55                                   ` Richard Biener
2021-08-11 16:57                                     ` Qing Zhao
2021-08-11 20:30                                     ` Qing Zhao
2021-08-11 22:03                                       ` Qing Zhao
2021-08-16  7:12                                         ` Richard Biener
2021-08-16 14:48                                           ` Qing Zhao
2021-08-16 15:08                                             ` Richard Biener
2021-08-16 15:39                                               ` Qing Zhao
2021-08-16  7:11                                       ` Richard Biener
2021-08-16 16:48                                         ` Qing Zhao
2021-08-17 15:04                                           ` Qing Zhao
2021-08-17 20:40                                             ` Qing Zhao
2021-08-18  7:19                                               ` Richard Biener
2021-08-18 14:39                                                 ` Qing Zhao
2021-08-11  9:02                   ` Richard Sandiford
2021-08-11 13:44                     ` Qing Zhao
2021-08-11 16:15                       ` Richard Sandiford
2021-08-11 16:29                         ` Qing Zhao
2021-08-12 19:24   ` Qing Zhao
2021-08-12 22:45     ` Qing Zhao [this message]
2021-08-16  7:40     ` Richard Biener
2021-08-16 15:45       ` Qing Zhao
2021-08-17  8:29         ` Richard Biener
2021-08-17 14:50           ` Qing Zhao
2021-08-17 16:08             ` Qing Zhao
2021-08-18  7:15               ` Richard Biener
2021-08-18 16:02                 ` Qing Zhao
2021-08-19  9:00                   ` Richard Biener
2021-08-19 13:54                     ` Qing Zhao
2021-08-20 14:52                       ` Qing Zhao
2021-08-23 13:55                       ` Richard Biener
2021-09-02 17:24                         ` Qing Zhao
2021-08-16 19:49       ` Qing Zhao
2021-08-17  8:43         ` Richard Biener
2021-08-17 14:03           ` Qing Zhao
2021-08-17 14:45             ` Richard Biener
2021-08-17 14:53               ` Qing Zhao

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=3D282310-784B-4CD8-92FB-4A6A613894C4@oracle.com \
    --to=qing.zhao@oracle.com \
    --cc=gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org \
    --cc=jakub@redhat.com \
    --cc=keescook@chromium.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).