From: Christophe Lyon <christophe.lyon@linaro.org>
To: Richard Biener <rguenther@suse.de>
Cc: Jakub Jelinek <jakub@redhat.com>,
"gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org" <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] operand_equal_p checking (PR sanitizer/70683)
Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2016 08:59:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAKdteOaip4ke00sJF5+-+9yz8D=t6_djfrz=VFMoWUftBtdPww@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.LSU.2.11.1604271440550.13384@t29.fhfr.qr>
Hi,
This caused: https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70843
On 27 April 2016 at 14:41, Richard Biener <rguenther@suse.de> wrote:
> On Wed, 27 Apr 2016, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>
>> On Tue, Apr 26, 2016 at 03:02:38PM +0200, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>> > The debugging hack is too ugly and slows down the compiler (by artificially
>> > increasing number of collisions), so it is not appropriate, but perhaps we
>> > can add some internal only use OEP_* flag, pass it to the recursive calls
>> > of operand_equal_p and if not set and flag_checking, verify
>> > iterative_hash_expr equality in the outermost call).
>>
>> Here is the corresponding checking patch. It uncovered two further issues
>> in the tree.[ch] patch which I'm going to post momentarily.
>> Both patches together bootstrapped/regtested on x86_64-linux and i686-linux,
>> ok for trunk?
>
> Ok.
>
> Thanks,
> Richard.
>
>> 2016-04-27 Jakub Jelinek <jakub@redhat.com>
>>
>> PR sanitizer/70683
>> * tree-core.h (enum operand_equal_flag): Add OEP_NO_HASH_CHECK.
>> * fold-const.c (operand_equal_p): If flag_checking and
>> OEP_NO_HASH_CHECK is not set in flag, recurse with OEP_NO_HASH_CHECK
>> and if it returns non-zero, assert iterative_hash_expr on both
>> args is the same.
>>
>> --- gcc/tree-core.h.jj 2016-04-22 18:21:55.000000000 +0200
>> +++ gcc/tree-core.h 2016-04-26 17:47:19.875753297 +0200
>> @@ -765,7 +765,9 @@ enum operand_equal_flag {
>> OEP_ONLY_CONST = 1,
>> OEP_PURE_SAME = 2,
>> OEP_MATCH_SIDE_EFFECTS = 4,
>> - OEP_ADDRESS_OF = 8
>> + OEP_ADDRESS_OF = 8,
>> + /* Internal within operand_equal_p: */
>> + OEP_NO_HASH_CHECK = 16
>> };
>>
>> /* Enum and arrays used for tree allocation stats.
>> --- gcc/fold-const.c.jj 2016-04-22 18:21:32.000000000 +0200
>> +++ gcc/fold-const.c 2016-04-26 18:30:40.919080701 +0200
>> @@ -2749,6 +2749,25 @@ combine_comparisons (location_t loc,
>> int
>> operand_equal_p (const_tree arg0, const_tree arg1, unsigned int flags)
>> {
>> + /* When checking, verify at the outermost operand_equal_p call that
>> + if operand_equal_p returns non-zero then ARG0 and ARG1 has the same
>> + hash value. */
>> + if (flag_checking && !(flags & OEP_NO_HASH_CHECK))
>> + {
>> + if (operand_equal_p (arg0, arg1, flags | OEP_NO_HASH_CHECK))
>> + {
>> + inchash::hash hstate0 (0), hstate1 (0);
>> + inchash::add_expr (arg0, hstate0, flags);
>> + inchash::add_expr (arg1, hstate1, flags);
>> + hashval_t h0 = hstate0.end ();
>> + hashval_t h1 = hstate1.end ();
>> + gcc_assert (h0 == h1);
>> + return 1;
>> + }
>> + else
>> + return 0;
>> + }
>> +
>> /* If either is ERROR_MARK, they aren't equal. */
>> if (TREE_CODE (arg0) == ERROR_MARK || TREE_CODE (arg1) == ERROR_MARK
>> || TREE_TYPE (arg0) == error_mark_node
>>
>>
>> Jakub
>>
>>
>
> --
> Richard Biener <rguenther@suse.de>
> SUSE LINUX GmbH, GF: Felix Imendoerffer, Jane Smithard, Graham Norton, HRB 21284 (AG Nuernberg)
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-04-28 8:59 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-04-26 13:02 [PATCH] Fix up inchash::add_expr to match more closely operand_equal_p " Jakub Jelinek
2016-04-26 22:51 ` [PATCH] operand_equal_p checking " Jakub Jelinek
2016-04-27 12:41 ` Richard Biener
2016-04-28 8:59 ` Christophe Lyon [this message]
2016-04-26 23:00 ` [PATCH] Fix up inchash::add_expr to match more closely operand_equal_p (PR sanitizer/70683, take 2) Jakub Jelinek
2016-04-27 7:41 ` Richard Biener
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='CAKdteOaip4ke00sJF5+-+9yz8D=t6_djfrz=VFMoWUftBtdPww@mail.gmail.com' \
--to=christophe.lyon@linaro.org \
--cc=gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org \
--cc=jakub@redhat.com \
--cc=rguenther@suse.de \
/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).