From: Jonathan Wakely <jwakely@redhat.com>
To: "François Dumont" <frs.dumont@gmail.com>
Cc: "libstdc++" <libstdc++@gcc.gnu.org>,
gcc Patches <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] libstdc++: Check [ptr, end) and [ptr, ptr+n) ranges with _GLIBCXX_ASSERTIONS
Date: Thu, 14 Oct 2021 18:43:23 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CACb0b4nuLds7yA5LwrdQhcsWaj-gtkfEWQEPGqfXD6wUbFxS0Q@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <2f87571d-8f17-6f70-d163-a9a38a2c37db@gmail.com>
On Thu, 14 Oct 2021 at 18:11, François Dumont <frs.dumont@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hi
>
> On a related subject I am waiting for some feedback on:
>
> https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/libstdc++/2021-August/053005.html
I'm concerned that this adds too much overhead for the
_GLIBCXX_ASSERTIONS case. It adds function calls which are not
necessarily inlined, and which perform arithmetic and comparisons on
the arguments. That has a runtime cost which is non-zero.
The patches I sent in this thread have zero runtime cost, because they
use the compiler built-in which compiles away to nothing if the sizes
aren't known.
>
> On 11/10/21 6:49 pm, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> > This enables lightweight checks for the __glibcxx_requires_valid_range
> > and __glibcxx_requires_string_len macros when _GLIBCXX_ASSERTIONS is
> > defined. By using __builtin_object_size we can check whether the end of
> > the range is part of the same object as the start of the range, and
> > detect problems like in PR 89927.
> >
> > libstdc++-v3/ChangeLog:
> >
> > * include/debug/debug.h (__valid_range_p, __valid_range_n): New
> > inline functions using __builtin_object_size to check ranges
> > delimited by pointers.
> > [_GLIBCXX_ASSERTIONS] (__glibcxx_requires_valid_range): Use
> > __valid_range_p.
> > [_GLIBCXX_ASSERTIONS] (__glibcxx_requires_string_len): Use
> > __valid_range_n.
> >
> >
> > The first patch allows us to detect bugs like string("foo", "bar"),
> > like in PR 89927. Debug mode cannot currently detect this. The new
> > check uses the compiler built-in to detect when the two arguments are
> > not part of the same object. This assumes we're optimizing and the
> > compiler knows the values of the pointers. If it doesn't, then the
> > function just returns true and should inline to nothing.
>
> I see, it does not detect that input pointers are unrelated but as they
> are the computed size is >= __sz.
>
> Isn't it UB to compare unrelated pointers ?
Yes, and my patch doesn't compare any pointers, does it?
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-10-14 17:43 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-10-11 16:49 [PATCH] libstdc++: Check [ptr,end) and [ptr,ptr+n) " Jonathan Wakely
2021-10-14 17:10 ` François Dumont
2021-10-14 17:43 ` Jonathan Wakely [this message]
2021-10-15 5:19 ` François Dumont
2021-10-15 8:47 ` [PATCH] libstdc++: Check [ptr, end) and [ptr, ptr+n) " Jonathan Wakely
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=CACb0b4nuLds7yA5LwrdQhcsWaj-gtkfEWQEPGqfXD6wUbFxS0Q@mail.gmail.com \
--to=jwakely@redhat.com \
--cc=frs.dumont@gmail.com \
--cc=gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org \
--cc=libstdc++@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).