From: "Jose E. Marchesi" <jose.marchesi@oracle.com>
To: David Faust <david.faust@oracle.com>
Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] bpf: handle anonymous members in CO-RE reloc [PR106745]
Date: Mon, 29 Aug 2022 21:57:38 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <874jxuu8jx.fsf@oracle.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20220829185255.5550-1-david.faust@oracle.com> (David Faust's message of "Mon, 29 Aug 2022 11:52:55 -0700")
Hi David.
> The old method for computing a member index for a CO-RE relocation
> relied on a name comparison, which could SEGV if the member in question
> is itself part of an anonymous inner struct or union.
>
> This patch changes the index computation to not rely on a name, while
> maintaining the ability to account for other sibling fields which may
> not have a representation in BTF.
>
> Tested in bpf-unknown-none, no known regressions.
> OK?
>
> Thanks.
>
> gcc/ChangeLog:
>
> PR target/106745
> * config/bpf/coreout.cc (bpf_core_get_sou_member_index): Fix
> computation of index for anonymous members.
>
> gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog:
>
> PR target/106745
> * gcc.target/bpf/core-pr106745.c: New test.
> ---
> gcc/config/bpf/coreout.cc | 19 +++++++++----
> gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/bpf/core-pr106745.c | 30 ++++++++++++++++++++
> 2 files changed, 44 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
> create mode 100644 gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/bpf/core-pr106745.c
>
> diff --git a/gcc/config/bpf/coreout.cc b/gcc/config/bpf/coreout.cc
> index cceaaa969cc..caad4380fa1 100644
> --- a/gcc/config/bpf/coreout.cc
> +++ b/gcc/config/bpf/coreout.cc
> @@ -207,7 +207,6 @@ bpf_core_get_sou_member_index (ctf_container_ref ctfc, const tree node)
> if (TREE_CODE (node) == FIELD_DECL)
> {
> const tree container = DECL_CONTEXT (node);
> - const char * name = IDENTIFIER_POINTER (DECL_NAME (node));
>
> /* Lookup the CTF type info for the containing type. */
> dw_die_ref die = lookup_type_die (container);
> @@ -222,16 +221,26 @@ bpf_core_get_sou_member_index (ctf_container_ref ctfc, const tree node)
> if (kind != CTF_K_STRUCT && kind != CTF_K_UNION)
> return -1;
>
> + tree field = TYPE_FIELDS (container);
> int i = 0;
> ctf_dmdef_t * dmd;
> for (dmd = dtd->dtd_u.dtu_members;
> dmd != NULL; dmd = (ctf_dmdef_t *) ctf_dmd_list_next (dmd))
> {
> if (get_btf_id (dmd->dmd_type) > BTF_MAX_TYPE)
> - continue;
> - if (strcmp (dmd->dmd_name, name) == 0)
> - return i;
> - i++;
> + {
> + /* This field does not have a BTF representation. */
> + if (field == node)
> + return -1;
> + }
> + else
> + {
> + if (field == node)
> + return i;
> + i++;
> + }
> +
> + field = DECL_CHAIN (field);
> }
I find the logic of the new conditional a little difficult to follow.
What about something like this instead:
for (dmd = dtd->dtd_u.dtu_members;
dmd != NULL; dmd = (ctf_dmdef_t *) ctf_dmd_list_next (dmd))
{
bool field_has_btf = get_btf_id (dmd->dmd_type) <= BTF_MAX_TYPE;
if (field == node)
return field_has_btf ? i : -1;
if (field_has_btf)
i++;
field = DECL_CHAIN (field);
}
WDYT?
> }
> return -1;
> diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/bpf/core-pr106745.c b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/bpf/core-pr106745.c
> new file mode 100644
> index 00000000000..9d347006a69
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/bpf/core-pr106745.c
> @@ -0,0 +1,30 @@
> +/* { dg-do compile } */
> +/* { dg-options "-O0 -gbtf -dA -mco-re" } */
> +
> +struct weird
> +{
> + struct
> + {
> + int b;
> + };
> +
> + char x;
> +
> + union
> + {
> + int a;
> + int c;
> + };
> +};
> +
> +
> +int test (struct weird *arg) {
> + int *x = __builtin_preserve_access_index (&arg->b);
> + int *y = __builtin_preserve_access_index (&arg->c);
> +
> + return *x + *y;
> +}
> +
> +
> +/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times "ascii \"0:0:0.0\"\[\t \]+\[^\n\]*btf_aux_string" 1 } } */
> +/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times "ascii \"0:2:1.0\"\[\t \]+\[^\n\]*btf_aux_string" 1 } } */
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-08-29 19:58 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-08-29 18:52 David Faust
2022-08-29 18:52 ` David Faust
2022-08-29 19:57 ` Jose E. Marchesi [this message]
2022-08-29 20:12 ` David Faust
2022-08-29 20:18 ` [PATCH v2] " David Faust
2022-08-29 20:27 ` Jose E. Marchesi
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=874jxuu8jx.fsf@oracle.com \
--to=jose.marchesi@oracle.com \
--cc=david.faust@oracle.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).