From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com [148.163.158.5]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B5F9838438DE for ; Wed, 18 May 2022 14:07:43 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.1 sourceware.org B5F9838438DE Received: from pps.filterd (m0098420.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com (8.17.1.5/8.17.1.5) with ESMTP id 24IDXrb3008117; Wed, 18 May 2022 14:07:42 GMT Received: from pps.reinject (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com (PPS) with ESMTPS id 3g51sq8xvp-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Wed, 18 May 2022 14:07:42 +0000 Received: from m0098420.ppops.net (m0098420.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by pps.reinject (8.17.1.5/8.17.1.5) with ESMTP id 24IDgIbW012510; Wed, 18 May 2022 14:07:41 GMT Received: from ppma03fra.de.ibm.com (6b.4a.5195.ip4.static.sl-reverse.com [149.81.74.107]) by mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com (PPS) with ESMTPS id 3g51sq8xu8-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Wed, 18 May 2022 14:07:41 +0000 Received: from pps.filterd (ppma03fra.de.ibm.com [127.0.0.1]) by ppma03fra.de.ibm.com (8.16.1.2/8.16.1.2) with SMTP id 24IE2fVD013126; Wed, 18 May 2022 14:07:40 GMT Received: from b06avi18878370.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (b06avi18878370.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com [9.149.26.194]) by ppma03fra.de.ibm.com with ESMTP id 3g2428vq7b-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Wed, 18 May 2022 14:07:39 +0000 Received: from d06av23.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (d06av23.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com [9.149.105.59]) by b06avi18878370.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (8.14.9/8.14.9/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id 24IE72nT35127620 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK); Wed, 18 May 2022 14:07:02 GMT Received: from d06av23.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id 83D0EA404D; Wed, 18 May 2022 14:07:37 +0000 (GMT) Received: from d06av23.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2BF02A4051; Wed, 18 May 2022 14:07:36 +0000 (GMT) Received: from [9.197.252.204] (unknown [9.197.252.204]) by d06av23.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP; Wed, 18 May 2022 14:07:35 +0000 (GMT) Message-ID: Date: Wed, 18 May 2022 22:07:34 +0800 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.15; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/91.6.1 Content-Language: en-US To: GCC Patches Cc: Segher Boessenkool , David Edelsohn From: "Kewen.Lin" Subject: [PATCH v3] rs6000: Fix the check of bif argument number [PR104482] Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-TM-AS-GCONF: 00 X-Proofpoint-ORIG-GUID: CtHkjdZXYZG1kxB-zmHy_-e53IeADKlg X-Proofpoint-GUID: qe7NsWb-Cu1Vk-A-SYlnA-DPBdsWYW8T Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Proofpoint-UnRewURL: 0 URL was un-rewritten MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=baseguard engine=ICAP:2.0.205,Aquarius:18.0.874,Hydra:6.0.486,FMLib:17.11.64.514 definitions=2022-05-18_05,2022-05-17_02,2022-02-23_01 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_notspam policy=outbound score=0 clxscore=1015 lowpriorityscore=0 malwarescore=0 adultscore=0 bulkscore=0 mlxscore=0 priorityscore=1501 impostorscore=0 phishscore=0 mlxlogscore=999 suspectscore=0 spamscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.12.0-2202240000 definitions=main-2205180083 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-11.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00, DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_EF, GIT_PATCH_0, KAM_SHORT, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2, SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS, TXREP, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on server2.sourceware.org X-BeenThere: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Gcc-patches mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 18 May 2022 14:07:45 -0000 Hi, As PR104482 shown, it's one regression about the handlings when the argument number is more than the one of built-in function prototype. The new bif support only catches the case that the argument number is less than the one of function prototype, but it misses the case that the argument number is more than the one of function prototype. Because it uses "n != expected_args", n is updated in for (n = 0; !VOID_TYPE_P (TREE_VALUE (fnargs)) && n < nargs; fnargs = TREE_CHAIN (fnargs), n++) , it's restricted to be less than or equal to expected_args with the guard !VOID_TYPE_P (TREE_VALUE (fnargs)), so it's wrong. The fix is to use nargs instead, also move the checking hunk's location ahead to avoid useless further scanning when the counts mismatch. Bootstrapped and regtested on powerpc64-linux-gnu P8 and powerpc64le-linux-gnu P9 and P10. v3: Update test case with dg-excess-errors. v2: Add one test case and refine commit logs. https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2022-April/593155.html v1: https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2022-March/591768.html Is it ok for trunk? BR, Kewen ----- PR target/104482 gcc/ChangeLog: * config/rs6000/rs6000-c.cc (altivec_resolve_overloaded_builtin): Fix the equality check for argument number, and move this hunk ahead. gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog: * gcc.target/powerpc/pr104482.c: New test. --- gcc/config/rs6000/rs6000-c.cc | 60 ++++++++++----------- gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/powerpc/pr104482.c | 16 ++++++ 2 files changed, 46 insertions(+), 30 deletions(-) create mode 100644 gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/powerpc/pr104482.c diff --git a/gcc/config/rs6000/rs6000-c.cc b/gcc/config/rs6000/rs6000-c.cc index 9c8cbd7a66e..61881f29230 100644 --- a/gcc/config/rs6000/rs6000-c.cc +++ b/gcc/config/rs6000/rs6000-c.cc @@ -1756,6 +1756,36 @@ altivec_resolve_overloaded_builtin (location_t loc, tree fndecl, vec *arglist = static_cast *> (passed_arglist); unsigned int nargs = vec_safe_length (arglist); + /* If the number of arguments did not match the prototype, return NULL + and the generic code will issue the appropriate error message. Skip + this test for functions where we don't fully describe all the possible + overload signatures in rs6000-overload.def (because they aren't relevant + to the expansion here). If we don't, we get confusing error messages. */ + /* As an example, for vec_splats we have: + +; There are no actual builtins for vec_splats. There is special handling for +; this in altivec_resolve_overloaded_builtin in rs6000-c.cc, where the call +; is replaced by a constructor. The single overload here causes +; __builtin_vec_splats to be registered with the front end so that can happen. +[VEC_SPLATS, vec_splats, __builtin_vec_splats] + vsi __builtin_vec_splats (vsi); + ABS_V4SI SPLATS_FAKERY + + So even though __builtin_vec_splats accepts all vector types, the + infrastructure cheats and just records one prototype. We end up getting + an error message that refers to this specific prototype even when we + are handling a different argument type. That is completely confusing + to the user, so it's best to let these cases be handled individually + in the resolve_vec_splats, etc., helper functions. */ + + if (expected_args != nargs + && !(fcode == RS6000_OVLD_VEC_PROMOTE + || fcode == RS6000_OVLD_VEC_SPLATS + || fcode == RS6000_OVLD_VEC_EXTRACT + || fcode == RS6000_OVLD_VEC_INSERT + || fcode == RS6000_OVLD_VEC_STEP)) + return NULL; + for (n = 0; !VOID_TYPE_P (TREE_VALUE (fnargs)) && n < nargs; fnargs = TREE_CHAIN (fnargs), n++) @@ -1816,36 +1846,6 @@ altivec_resolve_overloaded_builtin (location_t loc, tree fndecl, types[n] = type; } - /* If the number of arguments did not match the prototype, return NULL - and the generic code will issue the appropriate error message. Skip - this test for functions where we don't fully describe all the possible - overload signatures in rs6000-overload.def (because they aren't relevant - to the expansion here). If we don't, we get confusing error messages. */ - /* As an example, for vec_splats we have: - -; There are no actual builtins for vec_splats. There is special handling for -; this in altivec_resolve_overloaded_builtin in rs6000-c.cc, where the call -; is replaced by a constructor. The single overload here causes -; __builtin_vec_splats to be registered with the front end so that can happen. -[VEC_SPLATS, vec_splats, __builtin_vec_splats] - vsi __builtin_vec_splats (vsi); - ABS_V4SI SPLATS_FAKERY - - So even though __builtin_vec_splats accepts all vector types, the - infrastructure cheats and just records one prototype. We end up getting - an error message that refers to this specific prototype even when we - are handling a different argument type. That is completely confusing - to the user, so it's best to let these cases be handled individually - in the resolve_vec_splats, etc., helper functions. */ - - if (n != expected_args - && !(fcode == RS6000_OVLD_VEC_PROMOTE - || fcode == RS6000_OVLD_VEC_SPLATS - || fcode == RS6000_OVLD_VEC_EXTRACT - || fcode == RS6000_OVLD_VEC_INSERT - || fcode == RS6000_OVLD_VEC_STEP)) - return NULL; - /* Some overloads require special handling. */ tree returned_expr = NULL; resolution res = unresolved; diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/powerpc/pr104482.c b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/powerpc/pr104482.c new file mode 100644 index 00000000000..92191265e4c --- /dev/null +++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/powerpc/pr104482.c @@ -0,0 +1,16 @@ +/* { dg-require-effective-target powerpc_vsx_ok } */ +/* { dg-options "-mvsx" } */ + +/* It's to verify no ICE here, ignore error messages about + mismatch argument number since they are not test points + here. */ +/* { dg-excess-errors "pr104482" } */ + +__attribute__ ((altivec (vector__))) int vsi; + +double +testXXPERMDI (void) +{ + return __builtin_vsx_xxpermdi (vsi, vsi, 2, 4); +} +