From: Jeff Law <law@redhat.com>
To: Jakub Jelinek <jakub@redhat.com>
Cc: Xi Ruoyao <xry111@mengyan1223.wang>, gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] MIPS: Fix PR target/98491 (ChangeLog)
Date: Mon, 4 Jan 2021 14:19:33 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <7825bdca-1a9a-90dc-671f-1dda98e1f5f4@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210104210018.GD725145@tucnak>
On 1/4/21 2:00 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 04, 2021 at 01:51:59PM -0700, Jeff Law via Gcc-patches wrote:
>>> Sorry, I forgot to include the ChangeLog:
>>>
>>> gcc/ChangeLog:
>>>
>>> 2020-12-31 Xi Ruoyao <xry111@mengyan1223.wang>
>>>
>>> PR target/98491
>>> * config/mips/mips.c (mips_symbol_insns): Do not use
>>> MSA_SUPPORTED_MODE_P if mode is MAX_MACHINE_MODE.
>> So I absolutely agree the current code is wrong as it does an out of
>> bounds array access.
>>
>>
>> Would it be better to instead to change MSA_SUPPORTED_MODE_P to evaluate
>> to zero if MODE is MAX_MACHINE_MODE? That would protect all the uses of
>> MSA_SUPPORTED_MODE_P. Something like this perhaps?
> But MAX_MACHINE_MODE is the one past last valid mode, I'm not aware of
> any target that would protect all macros that deal with modes that way.
>
> So, perhaps best would be stop using the MAX_MACHINE_MODE as magic value
> for that function and instead use say VOIDmode that shouldn't normally
> appear either?
I think we have to allow VOIDmode because constants don't necessarily
have modes. And I certainly agree that using MAX_MACHINE_MODE like
this is ugly and error prone (as we can see from the BZ).
I also couldn't convince myself that the code and comments were actually
consistent, particularly for MSA targets which the comment claims can
never handle constants for ld/st (and thus should be returning 0 for
MAX_MACHINE_MODE). Though maybe mips_symbol_insns_1 ultimately handles
that correctly.
>
> But I don't really see anything wrong on the mips_symbol_insns above
> change either.
Me neither. I'm just questioning if bullet-proofing in the
MSA_SUPPORTED_MODE_P would be a better option. While I've worked in the
MIPS port in the past, I don't really have any significannt experience
with the MSA support.
jeff
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-01-04 21:19 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-12-31 23:29 [PATCH] MIPS: Fix PR target/98491 Xi Ruoyao
2020-12-31 23:34 ` [PATCH] MIPS: Fix PR target/98491 (ChangeLog) Xi Ruoyao
2021-01-04 20:51 ` Jeff Law
2021-01-04 21:00 ` Jakub Jelinek
2021-01-04 21:19 ` Jeff Law [this message]
2021-01-10 17:01 ` Xi Ruoyao
2021-01-10 17:04 ` Xi Ruoyao
2021-02-12 14:17 ` Xi Ruoyao
2021-02-12 14:54 ` Xi Ruoyao
2021-02-12 14:57 ` Xi Ruoyao
2021-02-12 15:15 ` Xi Ruoyao
2021-02-15 23:16 ` Jeff Law
2021-02-16 3:59 ` Xi Ruoyao
2021-02-17 11:13 ` Xi Ruoyao
2021-02-17 12:02 ` Richard Sandiford
2021-03-02 23:16 ` Jeff Law
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=7825bdca-1a9a-90dc-671f-1dda98e1f5f4@redhat.com \
--to=law@redhat.com \
--cc=gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org \
--cc=jakub@redhat.com \
--cc=xry111@mengyan1223.wang \
/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).