public inbox for gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Richard Biener <rguenther@suse.de>
To: Jakub Jelinek <jakub@redhat.com>
Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] operand_equal_p checking (PR sanitizer/70683)
Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2016 12:41:00 -0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <alpine.LSU.2.11.1604271440550.13384@t29.fhfr.qr> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20160426225139.GZ26501@tucnak.zalov.cz>

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)

  reply	other threads:[~2016-04-27 12:41 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 [this message]
2016-04-28  8:59     ` Christophe Lyon
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=alpine.LSU.2.11.1604271440550.13384@t29.fhfr.qr \
    --to=rguenther@suse.de \
    --cc=gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org \
    --cc=jakub@redhat.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).