public inbox for gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Jeff Law <law@redhat.com>
To: Tom de Vries <vries@codesourcery.com>
Cc: Zdenek Dvorak <rakdver@kam.mff.cuni.cz>, gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH PR45098] Disallow NULL pointer in pointer arithmetic
Date: Thu, 16 Jun 2011 22:03:00 -0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <4DFA7D1C.9040105@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4DF9A526.9060906@codesourcery.com>

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 06/16/11 00:39, Tom de Vries wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> Consider the following example.
> 
> extern unsigned int foo (int*) __attribute__((pure));
> unsigned int
> tr (int array[], int n)
> {
>   unsigned int i;
>   unsigned int sum = 0;
>   for (i = 0; i < n; i++)
>     sum += foo (&array[i]);
>   return sum;
> }
> 
> For 32-bit pointers, the analysis in infer_loop_bounds_from_pointer_arith
> currently concludes that the range of valid &array[i] is &array[0x0] to
> &array[0x3fffffff], meaning 0x40000000 distinct values.
> This implies that i < n is executed at most 0x40000001 times, and i < n
> cannot be eliminated by an 32-bit iterator with step 4, since that one has
> only 0x40000000 distinct values.
> 
> The patch reasons that NULL cannot be used or produced by pointer
> arithmetic, and that we can exclude the possibility of the NULL pointer in the
> range. So the range of valid &array[i] is &array[0] to &array[0x3ffffffe],
> meaning 0x3fffffff distinct values.
> This implies that i < n is executed at most 0x40000000 times and i < n can be
> eliminated.
> 
> The patch implements this new limitation by changing the (low, high, step)
> triplet in infer_loop_bounds_from_pointer_arith from (0x0, 0xffffffff, 0x4)
> to (0x4, 0xffffffff, 0x4).
> 
> I'm not too happy about the test for C-like language: ptrdiff_type_node !=
> NULL_TREE, but I'm not sure how else to test for this.
> 
> Bootstrapped and reg-tested on x86_64.
> 
> I will sent the adapted test cases in a separate email.
Interesting.  I'd never thought about the generation/use angle to prove
a pointer was non-null.  ISTM we could use that same logic to infer that
more pointers are non-null in extract_range_from_binary_expr.

Interested in tackling that improvement, obviously as an independent patch?

jeff
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Fedora - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/

iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJN+n0cAAoJEBRtltQi2kC7aRYH/1jyc0xmWEnzkxaMxdn9t5+p
asGN79nl8BSPifZapn2R7brEt9uQQNT6oAe/4wlCr0qf5f0FwMUV8U2QH8uMuez3
gqO+PuqcF6dSxR5+qskgljSjjLndxdFuaiN1Lb95jR9Wg3l/Nv6NGpjdgAaWHiVk
cmiuwAkVGSB46TGMMVnumFWTbXbXAK7udSk1PBDUZlY8Da+B9M2eGX9MuaPBNWvd
YSHRpkVVFAlyJIpwdtAojE6T2korZQyHAmYqiuArBPYxAN7cLuV8Gl4AagzyHcVz
Epkg7e0ayS1PnnQuH1JpAKGKH1DSlOmqo69JJpuL/kyaBh5lo4wu32RWHm/aGkY=
=fESM
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

  parent reply	other threads:[~2011-06-16 22:01 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2011-06-16  6:42 Tom de Vries
2011-06-16  6:51 ` Tom de Vries
2011-06-16  7:34 ` Zdenek Dvorak
2011-06-16 12:22   ` Tom de Vries
2011-06-16 15:33     ` Zdenek Dvorak
2011-06-16 15:42       ` Richard Guenther
2011-06-16 15:54         ` Zdenek Dvorak
2011-06-16 18:10           ` Tom de Vries
2011-06-16 22:03 ` Jeff Law [this message]
2011-06-17 10:44   ` Tom de Vries
2011-06-17 10:56     ` Richard Guenther
2011-06-17 10:57       ` Zdenek Dvorak
2011-06-17 11:13         ` Richard Guenther
2011-06-17 11:22           ` Zdenek Dvorak
2011-06-17 13:01             ` Richard Guenther
2011-06-17 14:57               ` Zdenek Dvorak
2011-06-17 18:24                 ` Jeff Law
2011-06-20 11:06                   ` Richard Guenther
2011-06-20 12:26                     ` Zdenek Dvorak
2011-06-20 12:41                       ` Zdenek Dvorak
2011-06-20 13:29                         ` Richard Guenther
2011-06-20 13:35                           ` Michael Matz

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=4DFA7D1C.9040105@redhat.com \
    --to=law@redhat.com \
    --cc=gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org \
    --cc=rakdver@kam.mff.cuni.cz \
    --cc=vries@codesourcery.com \
    /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).