From: Richard Biener <richard.guenther@gmail.com>
To: Martin Sebor <msebor@gmail.com>
Cc: Jeff Law <law@redhat.com>, GCC Patches <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] avoid warning on constant strncpy until next statement is reachable (PR 87028)
Date: Wed, 29 Aug 2018 07:29:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAFiYyc0eENNq0HHknbpMFmKH4Zr7o3W1742Y_M0WQZi1pk4niQ@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <6aaa70ca-af7f-2b34-43bc-953a02defe03@gmail.com>
On Wed, Aug 29, 2018 at 2:12 AM Martin Sebor <msebor@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >> Sadly, dstbase is the PARM_DECL for d. That's where things are going
> >> "wrong". Not sure why you're getting the PARM_DECL in that case. I'd
> >> debug get_addr_base_and_unit_offset to understand what's going on.
> >> Essentially you're getting different results of
> >> get_addr_base_and_unit_offset in a case where they arguably should be
> >> the same.
> >
> > Probably get_attr_nonstring_decl has the same "mistake" and returns
> > the PARM_DECL instead of the SSA name pointer. So we're comparing
> > apples and oranges here.
>
> Returning the SSA_NAME_VAR from get_attr_nonstring_decl() is
> intentional but the function need not (perhaps should not)
> also set *REF to it.
>
> >
> > Yeah:
> >
> > /* If EXPR refers to a character array or pointer declared attribute
> > nonstring return a decl for that array or pointer and set *REF to
> > the referenced enclosing object or pointer. Otherwise returns
> > null. */
> >
> > tree
> > get_attr_nonstring_decl (tree expr, tree *ref)
> > {
> > tree decl = expr;
> > if (TREE_CODE (decl) == SSA_NAME)
> > {
> > gimple *def = SSA_NAME_DEF_STMT (decl);
> >
> > if (is_gimple_assign (def))
> > {
> > tree_code code = gimple_assign_rhs_code (def);
> > if (code == ADDR_EXPR
> > || code == COMPONENT_REF
> > || code == VAR_DECL)
> > decl = gimple_assign_rhs1 (def);
> > }
> > else if (tree var = SSA_NAME_VAR (decl))
> > decl = var;
> > }
> >
> > if (TREE_CODE (decl) == ADDR_EXPR)
> > decl = TREE_OPERAND (decl, 0);
> >
> > if (ref)
> > *ref = decl;
> >
> > I see a lot of "magic" here again in the attempt to "propagate"
> > a nonstring attribute.
>
> That's the function's purpose: to look for the attribute. Is
> there a better way to do this?
Well, the question is what "nonstring" is, semantically. I read it
as sth like __restrinct - a pointer with "nonstring" attribute points
to a non-string. So I suspect your function either computes
"may expr point to a nonstring" or "must expr point to a nonstring"
if it gets a pointer argument. If it gets a (string) object it checks whether
that object is declared "nonstring" (thus, if you'd built a pointer to expr
whether that pointer _must_ point to a nonstring. So I guess the first
one is "must". Clearly looking at SSA_NAME_VAR isn't good here,
it would be semantically correct only for SSA_NAME_IS_DEFAULT_DEF
and SSA_NAME_VAR being a PARM_DECL.
I guess it would be nice to clearly separate the pointer vs. object case
by documentation in the function - all of the quoted parts above seem
to be for the address case so a gcc_assert (POINTER_TYPE_P (TREE_TYPE (decl))
inside the if (TREE_CODE (decl) == SSA_NAME) path should never trigger?
> > Note
> >
> > foo (char *p __attribute__(("nonstring")))
> > {
> > p = "bar";
> > strlen (p); // or whatever is necessary to call get_attr_nonstring_decl
> > }
> >
> > is perfectly valid and p as passed to strlen is _not_ nonstring(?).
>
> I don't know if you're saying that it should get a warning or
> shouldn't. Right now it doesn't because the strlen() call is
> folded before we check for nonstring.
I say it shouldn't because I assign "bar" to p and after that p isn't
the original parameter anymore?
> I could see an argument for diagnosing it but I suspect you
> wouldn't like it because it would mean more warning from
> the folder. I could also see an argument against it because,
> as you said, it's safe.
>
> If you take the assignment to p away then a warning is issued,
> and that's because p is declared with attribute nonstring.
> That's also why get_attr_nonstring_decl looks at SSA_NAME_VAR.
>
> > I think in your code comparing bases you want to look at the _original_
> > argument to the string function rather than what get_attr_nonstring_decl
> > returned as ref.
>
> I've adjusted get_attr_nonstring_decl() to avoid setting *REF
> to SSA_NAME_VAR. That let me remove the GIMPLE_NOP code from
> the patch. I've also updated the comment above SSA_NAME_VAR
> to clarify its purpose per Jeff's comments.
>
> Attached is an updated revision with these changes.
>
> Martin
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-08-29 7:29 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 46+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-08-24 15:58 Martin Sebor
2018-08-26 5:25 ` Jeff Law
2018-08-27 8:30 ` Richard Biener
2018-08-27 15:32 ` Jeff Law
2018-08-27 15:43 ` Richard Biener
2018-10-04 15:51 ` Jeff Law
2018-10-04 15:55 ` Martin Sebor
2018-10-08 10:14 ` Richard Biener
2018-10-08 21:40 ` Martin Sebor
2018-10-16 22:42 ` Jeff Law
2018-10-21 8:17 ` Martin Sebor
2018-10-31 17:07 ` [PING #3][PATCH] " Martin Sebor
2018-11-16 3:12 ` [PING #4][PATCH] " Martin Sebor
2018-11-16 9:07 ` Richard Biener
2018-11-29 20:34 ` Martin Sebor
2018-11-29 23:07 ` Jeff Law
2018-11-29 23:43 ` Martin Sebor
2018-11-30 2:02 ` Jeff Law
2018-11-30 8:05 ` Richard Biener
2018-11-30 8:30 ` Jakub Jelinek
2018-12-05 23:11 ` Jeff Law
2018-12-06 13:00 ` Christophe Lyon
2018-12-06 13:52 ` Jeff Law
2018-11-30 7:57 ` Richard Biener
2018-11-30 15:51 ` Martin Sebor
2018-11-07 21:28 ` [PATCH] " Jeff Law
2018-11-09 1:25 ` Martin Sebor
2018-10-04 19:55 ` Joseph Myers
2018-08-27 16:27 ` Martin Sebor
2018-08-28 4:27 ` Jeff Law
2018-08-28 9:56 ` Richard Biener
2018-08-28 9:57 ` Richard Biener
2018-08-29 0:12 ` Martin Sebor
2018-08-29 7:29 ` Richard Biener [this message]
2018-08-29 15:43 ` Martin Sebor
2018-08-30 0:27 ` Jeff Law
2018-08-30 8:48 ` Richard Biener
2018-09-12 15:50 ` Martin Sebor
2018-09-18 1:56 ` Jeff Law
2018-09-21 17:40 ` Martin Sebor
2018-10-01 21:31 ` [PING] " Martin Sebor
2018-10-08 22:15 ` Martin Sebor
2018-10-04 15:52 ` Jeff Law
2018-08-28 20:44 ` Martin Sebor
2018-08-28 22:17 ` Jeff Law
2018-08-27 20:31 ` Martin Sebor
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=CAFiYyc0eENNq0HHknbpMFmKH4Zr7o3W1742Y_M0WQZi1pk4niQ@mail.gmail.com \
--to=richard.guenther@gmail.com \
--cc=gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org \
--cc=law@redhat.com \
--cc=msebor@gmail.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).