From: Jakub Jelinek <jakub@redhat.com>
To: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [committed] lowerbitint: Fix 2 bitint lowering bugs [PR111625]
Date: Sat, 30 Sep 2023 11:37:55 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <ZRfsc2tlekX5SCQd@tucnak> (raw)
Hi!
This patch fixes 2 issues. One is when we want to get address of
an uninitialized large/huge bitint SSA_NAME for multiplication/division/modulo
or conversion to floating point (binary or decimal), the code just creates
an uninitialized limb sized variable and passes address of that, but I forgot
to initialize *prec in that case, so it invoked UB at compile time rather
than at runtime. As it is UB, we could use anything valid as precision there,
say 2 bits for signed, 1 bit for unsigned as smallest possible set of values,
or full bitint precision as full random value. Though, because we only pass
address to a single limb, I think it is best to pass the bitsize of the limb.
And the other issue is that when ranger in range_to_prec finds some range
is undefined_p (), it will assert {lower,upper}_bound () method isn't called
on it, but we were. So, the patch adjusts range_to_proc to treat it like
the !optimized case, full bitint precision.
Bootstrapped/regtested on x86_64-linux and i686-linux, committed to trunk.
2023-09-30 Jakub Jelinek <jakub@redhat.com>
PR middle-end/111625
PR middle-end/111637
* gimple-lower-bitint.cc (range_to_prec): Use prec or -prec if
r.undefined_p ().
(bitint_large_huge::handle_operand_addr): For uninitialized operands
use limb_prec or -limb_prec precision.
--- gcc/gimple-lower-bitint.cc.jj 2023-09-20 09:45:39.000000000 +0200
+++ gcc/gimple-lower-bitint.cc 2023-09-29 16:29:36.541473743 +0200
@@ -1932,7 +1932,8 @@ range_to_prec (tree op, gimple *stmt)
unsigned int prec = TYPE_PRECISION (type);
if (!optimize
- || !get_range_query (cfun)->range_of_expr (r, op, stmt))
+ || !get_range_query (cfun)->range_of_expr (r, op, stmt)
+ || r.undefined_p ())
{
if (TYPE_UNSIGNED (type))
return prec;
@@ -2066,6 +2067,9 @@ bitint_large_huge::handle_operand_addr (
}
else if (gimple_code (g) == GIMPLE_NOP)
{
+ *prec = TYPE_UNSIGNED (TREE_TYPE (op)) ? limb_prec : -limb_prec;
+ if (prec_stored)
+ *prec_stored = *prec;
tree var = create_tmp_var (m_limb_type);
TREE_ADDRESSABLE (var) = 1;
ret = build_fold_addr_expr (var);
Jakub
reply other threads:[~2023-09-30 9:38 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: [no followups] expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed
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=ZRfsc2tlekX5SCQd@tucnak \
--to=jakub@redhat.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).