From: Qing Zhao <qing.zhao@oracle.com>
To: Richard Biener <rguenther@suse.de>
Cc: Richard Sandiford <richard.sandiford@arm.com>,
Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>,
gcc-patches Qing Zhao via <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH][version 3]add -ftrivial-auto-var-init and variable attribute "uninitialized" to gcc
Date: Tue, 22 Jun 2021 14:10:52 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <DE706AAB-E90A-4A48-AA39-D2D74F3C5E6F@oracle.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <nycvar.YFH.7.76.2106221559170.9200@zhemvz.fhfr.qr>
> On Jun 22, 2021, at 9:00 AM, Richard Biener <rguenther@suse.de> wrote:
>
> On Tue, 22 Jun 2021, Qing Zhao wrote:
>
>> So, I am wondering why not still keep my current implementation on
>> assign different patterns for different types?
>>
>> This major issue with this design is the code size and runtime overhead,
>> but for debugging purpose, those are not that important, right? And we
>> can add some optimization later to improve the code size and runtime
>> overhead.
>>
>> Otherwise, if we only use one pattern for all the types in this initial
>> version, later we still might need change it.
>>
>> How do you think?
>
> No, let's not re-open that discussion. As said we can look to support
> multi-byte pattern if that has a chance to improve things but only
> as followup.
I am fine with this.
However, we need to decide whether we will use one-byte repeatable pattern, or multiple-byte repeatable pattern now,
Since the implementation will be different. If using one-byte, the implementation will be the simplest, we can use memset for all
VLA, non-vla, zero-init, or pattern-init consistently.
However, if we choose multiple-byte pattern, then the implementation will be different, we cannot use memset for pattern-init, and
The implemenation for VLA pattern-init also is different.
Qing
>
> Thanks,
> Richard.
>
>> Qing
>>
>> On Jun 22, 2021, at 3:59 AM, Richard Biener <rguenther@suse.de<mailto:rguenther@suse.de>> wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, 22 Jun 2021, Richard Sandiford wrote:
>>
>> Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org<mailto:keescook@chromium.org>> writes:
>> On Mon, Jun 21, 2021 at 03:39:45PM +0000, Qing Zhao wrote:
>> So, if “pattern value” is “0xFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF”, then it’s a valid canonical virtual memory address. However, for most OS, “0xFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF” should be not in user space.
>>
>> My question is, is “0xFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF” good for pointer? Or “0xAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA” better?
>>
>> I think 0xFF repeating is fine for this version. Everything else is a
>> "nice to have" for the pattern-init, IMO. :)
>>
>> Sorry to be awkward, but 0xFF seems worse than 0xAA to me.
>>
>> For integer types, all values are valid representations, and we're
>> relying on the pattern being “obviously” wrong in context. 0xAAAA…
>> is unlikely to be a correct integer but 0xFFFF… would instead be a
>> “nice” -1. It would be difficult to tell in a debugger that a -1
>> came from pattern init rather than a deliberate choice.
>>
>> I agree that, all other things being equal, it would be nice to use NaNs
>> for floats. But relying on wrong numerical values for floats doesn't
>> seem worse than doing that for integers.
>>
>> 0xAA… for float is (if I've got this right) -3.0316488252093987e-13,
>> which admittedly doesn't stand out as wrong. But I'm not sure we
>> should sacrifice integer debugging for float debugging here.
>>
>> We can always expose the actual value as --param. Now, I think
>> we'd need a two-byte pattern to reliably produce NaNs anyway,
>> so with floats taken out of the picture the focus should be on
>> pointers where IMHO val & 1 and val & 15 would be nice to have.
>> So sth like 0xf7 would work for those. With a two-byte pattern
>> we could use 0xffef or 0x7fef.
>>
>> Anyway, it's probably down to priorities of the project involved
>> (debugging FP stuff or integer stuff).
>>
>> Richard.
>>
>>
>
> --
> Richard Biener <rguenther@suse.de>
> SUSE Software Solutions Germany GmbH, Maxfeldstrasse 5, 90409 Nuernberg,
> Germany; GF: Felix Imendörffer; HRB 36809 (AG Nuernberg)
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-06-22 14:11 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 57+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-05-12 17:16 Qing Zhao
2021-05-25 19:26 ` Qing Zhao
2021-05-26 11:18 ` Richard Biener
2021-05-27 19:44 ` Qing Zhao
2021-06-07 7:48 ` Richard Biener
2021-06-07 16:13 ` Qing Zhao
2021-06-08 7:37 ` Richard Biener
2021-06-08 16:56 ` Kees Cook
2021-06-08 17:32 ` Qing Zhao
2021-06-08 17:36 ` Kees Cook
2021-06-07 23:45 ` Kees Cook
2021-06-08 8:27 ` Richard Biener
2021-05-27 21:42 ` Qing Zhao
2021-06-03 20:14 ` Qing Zhao
2021-06-07 7:50 ` Richard Biener
2021-06-03 20:18 ` Qing Zhao
2021-06-07 7:53 ` Richard Biener
2021-06-07 16:18 ` Qing Zhao
2021-06-07 23:48 ` Kees Cook
2021-06-08 7:41 ` Richard Biener
2021-06-08 15:27 ` Qing Zhao
2021-06-08 16:59 ` Kees Cook
2021-06-08 18:05 ` Qing Zhao
2021-06-11 11:04 ` Richard Biener
2021-06-11 17:14 ` Kees Cook
2021-06-10 21:11 ` Qing Zhao
2021-06-11 11:12 ` Richard Biener
2021-06-11 15:49 ` Qing Zhao
2021-06-11 16:24 ` Kees Cook
2021-06-11 17:00 ` Qing Zhao
2021-06-14 16:10 ` Qing Zhao
2021-06-15 13:21 ` Richard Biener
2021-06-15 21:49 ` Qing Zhao
2021-06-16 6:19 ` Richard Biener
2021-06-16 15:04 ` Qing Zhao
2021-06-16 19:39 ` Qing Zhao
2021-06-18 23:47 ` Kees Cook
2021-06-21 15:39 ` Qing Zhao
2021-06-21 16:18 ` Kees Cook
2021-06-21 17:11 ` Qing Zhao
2021-06-22 8:25 ` Richard Sandiford
2021-06-22 8:59 ` Richard Biener
2021-06-22 13:54 ` Qing Zhao
2021-06-22 14:00 ` Richard Biener
2021-06-22 14:10 ` Qing Zhao [this message]
2021-06-22 14:15 ` Richard Biener
2021-06-22 14:33 ` Qing Zhao
2021-06-22 19:04 ` Richard Biener
2021-06-22 17:55 ` Kees Cook
2021-06-22 18:18 ` Richard Sandiford
2021-06-22 21:31 ` Qing Zhao
2021-06-23 6:05 ` Richard Biener
2021-06-21 7:53 ` Richard Biener
2021-06-21 15:11 ` Qing Zhao
2021-06-21 15:35 ` Richard Biener
2021-06-21 16:13 ` Qing Zhao
2021-06-22 6:24 ` 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=DE706AAB-E90A-4A48-AA39-D2D74F3C5E6F@oracle.com \
--to=qing.zhao@oracle.com \
--cc=gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org \
--cc=keescook@chromium.org \
--cc=rguenther@suse.de \
--cc=richard.sandiford@arm.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).