* Re: [PATCH][gcc] libgccjit: check result_type in gcc_jit_context_new_unary_op
2019-01-01 0:00 [PATCH][gcc] libgccjit: check result_type in gcc_jit_context_new_unary_op Andrea Corallo
2019-01-01 0:00 ` David Malcolm
@ 2019-01-01 0:00 ` David Malcolm
2019-01-01 0:00 ` Andrea Corallo
2019-01-01 0:00 ` Andrea Corallo
1 sibling, 2 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: David Malcolm @ 2019-01-01 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Andrea Corallo, jit, gcc-patches; +Cc: nd
On Thu, 2019-07-18 at 14:20 +0000, Andrea Corallo wrote:
> Hi all,
> I've just realized that what we has been done recently for
> gcc_jit_context_new_binary_op should be done also for the unary
> version.
> This patch checks at record time for the result type of
> gcc_jit_context_new_unary_op to be numeric type plus add a testcase
> for the new check.
>
> make check-jit runs clean
>
> Is it okay for trunk?
>
> Bests
> Andrea
>
> gcc/jit/ChangeLog
> 2019-07-18 Andrea Corallo <andrea.corallo@arm.com>
>
> * libgccjit.c (gcc_jit_context_new_unary_op): Check result_type
> to be a
> numeric type.
> * libgccjit.c (gcc_jit_context_new_binary_op): Fix nit in error
> message.
>
> gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog
> 2019-07-04 Andrea Corallo <andrea.corallo@arm.com>
>
> * jit.dg/test-error-gcc_jit_context_new_unary_op-bad-res-
> type.c:
> New testcase.
> * jit.dg/test-error-gcc_jit_context_new_binary_op-bad-res-
> type.c:
> Fix nit in error message.
Thanks for the patch. What happens with the existing code if the user
tries to use such a unary op?
> diff --git a/gcc/jit/libgccjit.c b/gcc/jit/libgccjit.c
> index 23e83e2..bea840f 100644
> --- a/gcc/jit/libgccjit.c
> +++ b/gcc/jit/libgccjit.c
> @@ -1336,6 +1336,12 @@ gcc_jit_context_new_unary_op (gcc_jit_context *ctxt,
> "unrecognized value for enum gcc_jit_unary_op: %i",
> op);
> RETURN_NULL_IF_FAIL (result_type, ctxt, loc, "NULL result_type");
> + RETURN_NULL_IF_FAIL_PRINTF3 (
> + result_type->is_numeric (), ctxt, loc,
> + "gcc_jit_unary_op %i with operand %s "
> + "has non-numeric result_type: %s",
> + op, rvalue->get_debug_string (),
> + result_type->get_debug_string ());
> RETURN_NULL_IF_FAIL (rvalue, ctxt, loc, "NULL rvalue");
The use of "%i" for "op" here isn't as user-friendly as it could be; it
would be ideal to tell the user the enum value.
"op" has already been validated, so why not expose the currently-static
unary_op_reproducer_strings from jit-recording.c in an internal header,
and use it here with a "%s"?
> return (gcc_jit_rvalue *)ctxt->new_unary_op (loc, op, result_type,
rvalue);
> @@ -1388,7 +1394,7 @@ gcc_jit_context_new_binary_op (gcc_jit_context
*ctxt,
> RETURN_NULL_IF_FAIL_PRINTF4 (
> result_type->is_numeric (), ctxt, loc,
> "gcc_jit_binary_op %i with operands a: %s b: %s "
> - "has non numeric result_type: %s",
> + "has non-numeric result_type: %s",
> op, a->get_debug_string (), b->get_debug_string (),
> result_type->get_debug_string ());
Ah, I see there's one of these "%i" for op already. Given that you're
already fixing a nit here, please make this print "%s", using
binary_op_reproducer_strings from jit-recording.c ("op" has already
been validated).
Thanks
Dave
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH][gcc] libgccjit: check result_type in gcc_jit_context_new_unary_op
2019-01-01 0:00 [PATCH][gcc] libgccjit: check result_type in gcc_jit_context_new_unary_op Andrea Corallo
@ 2019-01-01 0:00 ` David Malcolm
2019-01-01 0:00 ` Andrea Corallo
2019-01-01 0:00 ` David Malcolm
1 sibling, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: David Malcolm @ 2019-01-01 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Andrea Corallo, jit, gcc-patches; +Cc: nd
On Thu, 2019-07-18 at 14:20 +0000, Andrea Corallo wrote:
> Hi all,
> I've just realized that what we has been done recently for
> gcc_jit_context_new_binary_op should be done also for the unary
> version.
> This patch checks at record time for the result type of
> gcc_jit_context_new_unary_op to be numeric type plus add a testcase
> for the new check.
>
> make check-jit runs clean
>
> Is it okay for trunk?
Thanks - this is good for trunk.
Dave
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH][gcc] libgccjit: check result_type in gcc_jit_context_new_unary_op
2019-01-01 0:00 ` David Malcolm
@ 2019-01-01 0:00 ` Andrea Corallo
2019-01-01 0:00 ` Andrea Corallo
1 sibling, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Andrea Corallo @ 2019-01-01 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: David Malcolm; +Cc: Andrea Corallo, jit, gcc-patches, nd
David Malcolm writes:
> On Thu, 2019-07-18 at 14:20 +0000, Andrea Corallo wrote:
>> Hi all,
>> I've just realized that what we has been done recently for
>> gcc_jit_context_new_binary_op should be done also for the unary
>> version.
>> This patch checks at record time for the result type of
>> gcc_jit_context_new_unary_op to be numeric type plus add a testcase
>> for the new check.
>>
>> make check-jit runs clean
>>
>> Is it okay for trunk?
>>
>> Bests
>> Andrea
>>
>> gcc/jit/ChangeLog
>> 2019-07-18 Andrea Corallo <andrea.corallo@arm.com>
>>
>> * libgccjit.c (gcc_jit_context_new_unary_op): Check result_type
>> to be a
>> numeric type.
>> * libgccjit.c (gcc_jit_context_new_binary_op): Fix nit in error
>> message.
>>
>> gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog
>> 2019-07-04 Andrea Corallo <andrea.corallo@arm.com>
>>
>> * jit.dg/test-error-gcc_jit_context_new_unary_op-bad-res-
>> type.c:
>> New testcase.
>> * jit.dg/test-error-gcc_jit_context_new_binary_op-bad-res-
>> type.c:
>> Fix nit in error message.
>
> Thanks for the patch. What happens with the existing code if the user
> tries to use such a unary op?
In case the res type is something "exotic" like a structure I've
encountered an ICE, if I'm not wrong again during gimplification.
>> diff --git a/gcc/jit/libgccjit.c b/gcc/jit/libgccjit.c
>> index 23e83e2..bea840f 100644
>> --- a/gcc/jit/libgccjit.c
>> +++ b/gcc/jit/libgccjit.c
>> @@ -1336,6 +1336,12 @@ gcc_jit_context_new_unary_op (gcc_jit_context *ctxt,
>> "unrecognized value for enum gcc_jit_unary_op: %i",
>> op);
>> RETURN_NULL_IF_FAIL (result_type, ctxt, loc, "NULL result_type");
>> + RETURN_NULL_IF_FAIL_PRINTF3 (
>> + result_type->is_numeric (), ctxt, loc,
>> + "gcc_jit_unary_op %i with operand %s "
>> + "has non-numeric result_type: %s",
>> + op, rvalue->get_debug_string (),
>> + result_type->get_debug_string ());
>> RETURN_NULL_IF_FAIL (rvalue, ctxt, loc, "NULL rvalue");
>
> The use of "%i" for "op" here isn't as user-friendly as it could be; it
> would be ideal to tell the user the enum value.
>
> "op" has already been validated, so why not expose the currently-static
> unary_op_reproducer_strings from jit-recording.c in an internal header,
> and use it here with a "%s"?
>
>> return (gcc_jit_rvalue *)ctxt->new_unary_op (loc, op, result_type,
> rvalue);
>> @@ -1388,7 +1394,7 @@ gcc_jit_context_new_binary_op (gcc_jit_context
> *ctxt,
>> RETURN_NULL_IF_FAIL_PRINTF4 (
>> result_type->is_numeric (), ctxt, loc,
>> "gcc_jit_binary_op %i with operands a: %s b: %s "
>> - "has non numeric result_type: %s",
>> + "has non-numeric result_type: %s",
>> op, a->get_debug_string (), b->get_debug_string (),
>> result_type->get_debug_string ());
>
> Ah, I see there's one of these "%i" for op already. Given that you're
> already fixing a nit here, please make this print "%s", using
> binary_op_reproducer_strings from jit-recording.c ("op" has already
> been validated).
>
> Thanks
> Dave
That's a really good idea I'll update the patch.
Thanks for the comments.
Bests
Andrea
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH][gcc] libgccjit: check result_type in gcc_jit_context_new_unary_op
2019-01-01 0:00 ` David Malcolm
2019-01-01 0:00 ` Andrea Corallo
@ 2019-01-01 0:00 ` Andrea Corallo
1 sibling, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Andrea Corallo @ 2019-01-01 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: David Malcolm; +Cc: Andrea Corallo, jit, gcc-patches, nd
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 823 bytes --]
Hi all,
second version of the patch here addressing comments.
make check-jit runs clean
Bests
Andrea
gcc/jit/ChangeLog
2019-07-18 Andrea Corallo <andrea.corallo@arm.com>
* jit-recording.c (unary_op_reproducer_strings): Make it extern.
(binary_op_reproducer_strings): Likewise.
* jit-recording.h (unary_op_reproducer_strings): Likewise.
(binary_op_reproducer_strings): Likewise.
* libgccjit.c (gcc_jit_context_new_unary_op): Check result_type to be a
numeric type.
* libgccjit.c (gcc_jit_context_new_binary_op): Improve error message.
gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog
2019-07-04 Andrea Corallo <andrea.corallo@arm.com>
* jit.dg/test-error-gcc_jit_context_new_unary_op-bad-res-type.c:
New testcase.
* jit.dg/test-error-gcc_jit_context_new_binary_op-bad-res-type.c:
Adjust error message.
[-- Warning: decoded text below may be mangled, UTF-8 assumed --]
[-- Attachment #2: unary_op_check_result_type.patch --]
[-- Type: text/x-diff; name="unary_op_check_result_type.patch", Size: 4977 bytes --]
diff --git a/gcc/jit/jit-recording.c b/gcc/jit/jit-recording.c
index 495ac7f..2f75395 100644
--- a/gcc/jit/jit-recording.c
+++ b/gcc/jit/jit-recording.c
@@ -4888,7 +4888,7 @@ recording::unary_op::make_debug_string ()
m_a->get_debug_string ());
}
-static const char * const unary_op_reproducer_strings[] = {
+const char * const unary_op_reproducer_strings[] = {
"GCC_JIT_UNARY_OP_MINUS",
"GCC_JIT_UNARY_OP_BITWISE_NEGATE",
"GCC_JIT_UNARY_OP_LOGICAL_NEGATE",
@@ -4968,7 +4968,7 @@ recording::binary_op::make_debug_string ()
m_b->get_debug_string_parens (prec));
}
-static const char * const binary_op_reproducer_strings[] = {
+const char * const binary_op_reproducer_strings[] = {
"GCC_JIT_BINARY_OP_PLUS",
"GCC_JIT_BINARY_OP_MINUS",
"GCC_JIT_BINARY_OP_MULT",
diff --git a/gcc/jit/jit-recording.h b/gcc/jit/jit-recording.h
index 13ec7ea..4bd346e 100644
--- a/gcc/jit/jit-recording.h
+++ b/gcc/jit/jit-recording.h
@@ -30,6 +30,9 @@ namespace gcc {
namespace jit {
+extern const char * const unary_op_reproducer_strings[];
+extern const char * const binary_op_reproducer_strings[];
+
class result;
class dump;
class reproducer;
diff --git a/gcc/jit/libgccjit.c b/gcc/jit/libgccjit.c
index 23e83e2..eec2f00 100644
--- a/gcc/jit/libgccjit.c
+++ b/gcc/jit/libgccjit.c
@@ -1336,6 +1336,13 @@ gcc_jit_context_new_unary_op (gcc_jit_context *ctxt,
"unrecognized value for enum gcc_jit_unary_op: %i",
op);
RETURN_NULL_IF_FAIL (result_type, ctxt, loc, "NULL result_type");
+ RETURN_NULL_IF_FAIL_PRINTF3 (
+ result_type->is_numeric (), ctxt, loc,
+ "gcc_jit_unary_op %s with operand %s "
+ "has non-numeric result_type: %s",
+ gcc::jit::unary_op_reproducer_strings[op],
+ rvalue->get_debug_string (),
+ result_type->get_debug_string ());
RETURN_NULL_IF_FAIL (rvalue, ctxt, loc, "NULL rvalue");
return (gcc_jit_rvalue *)ctxt->new_unary_op (loc, op, result_type, rvalue);
@@ -1387,9 +1394,10 @@ gcc_jit_context_new_binary_op (gcc_jit_context *ctxt,
b->get_type ()->get_debug_string ());
RETURN_NULL_IF_FAIL_PRINTF4 (
result_type->is_numeric (), ctxt, loc,
- "gcc_jit_binary_op %i with operands a: %s b: %s "
- "has non numeric result_type: %s",
- op, a->get_debug_string (), b->get_debug_string (),
+ "gcc_jit_binary_op %s with operands a: %s b: %s "
+ "has non-numeric result_type: %s",
+ gcc::jit::binary_op_reproducer_strings[op],
+ a->get_debug_string (), b->get_debug_string (),
result_type->get_debug_string ());
return (gcc_jit_rvalue *)ctxt->new_binary_op (loc, op, result_type, a, b);
diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/jit.dg/test-error-gcc_jit_context_new_binary_op-bad-res-type.c b/gcc/testsuite/jit.dg/test-error-gcc_jit_context_new_binary_op-bad-res-type.c
index abadc9f..fbbb2e7 100644
--- a/gcc/testsuite/jit.dg/test-error-gcc_jit_context_new_binary_op-bad-res-type.c
+++ b/gcc/testsuite/jit.dg/test-error-gcc_jit_context_new_binary_op-bad-res-type.c
@@ -35,7 +35,7 @@ verify_code (gcc_jit_context *ctxt, gcc_jit_result *result)
/* Verify that the correct error message was emitted. */
CHECK_STRING_VALUE (gcc_jit_context_get_first_error (ctxt),
- "gcc_jit_context_new_binary_op: gcc_jit_binary_op 1 with"
- " operands a: (int)1 b: (int)2 has non numeric "
- "result_type: void *");
+ "gcc_jit_context_new_binary_op: gcc_jit_binary_op "
+ "GCC_JIT_BINARY_OP_MINUS with operands a: "
+ "(int)1 b: (int)2 has non-numeric result_type: void *");
}
diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/jit.dg/test-error-gcc_jit_context_new_unary_op-bad-res-type.c b/gcc/testsuite/jit.dg/test-error-gcc_jit_context_new_unary_op-bad-res-type.c
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..fae722a
--- /dev/null
+++ b/gcc/testsuite/jit.dg/test-error-gcc_jit_context_new_unary_op-bad-res-type.c
@@ -0,0 +1,38 @@
+#include <stdlib.h>
+#include <stdio.h>
+
+#include "libgccjit.h"
+
+#include "harness.h"
+
+/* Try to create an unary operator with invalid result type. */
+
+void
+create_code (gcc_jit_context *ctxt, void *user_data)
+{
+ gcc_jit_type *int_type =
+ gcc_jit_context_get_type (ctxt, GCC_JIT_TYPE_INT);
+ gcc_jit_type *void_ptr_type =
+ gcc_jit_context_get_type (ctxt, GCC_JIT_TYPE_VOID_PTR);
+
+ gcc_jit_context_new_unary_op (
+ ctxt,
+ NULL,
+ GCC_JIT_UNARY_OP_LOGICAL_NEGATE,
+ void_ptr_type,
+ gcc_jit_context_new_rvalue_from_int (ctxt,
+ int_type,
+ 1));
+}
+
+void
+verify_code (gcc_jit_context *ctxt, gcc_jit_result *result)
+{
+ CHECK_VALUE (result, NULL);
+
+ /* Verify that the correct error message was emitted. */
+ CHECK_STRING_VALUE (gcc_jit_context_get_first_error (ctxt),
+ "gcc_jit_context_new_unary_op: gcc_jit_unary_op "
+ "GCC_JIT_UNARY_OP_LOGICAL_NEGATE with operand "
+ "(int)1 has non-numeric result_type: void *");
+}
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* [PATCH][gcc] libgccjit: check result_type in gcc_jit_context_new_unary_op
@ 2019-01-01 0:00 Andrea Corallo
2019-01-01 0:00 ` David Malcolm
2019-01-01 0:00 ` David Malcolm
0 siblings, 2 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Andrea Corallo @ 2019-01-01 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: jit, gcc-patches; +Cc: nd
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 865 bytes --]
Hi all,
I've just realized that what we has been done recently for
gcc_jit_context_new_binary_op should be done also for the unary
version.
This patch checks at record time for the result type of
gcc_jit_context_new_unary_op to be numeric type plus add a testcase
for the new check.
make check-jit runs clean
Is it okay for trunk?
Bests
Andrea
gcc/jit/ChangeLog
2019-07-18 Andrea Corallo <andrea.corallo@arm.com>
* libgccjit.c (gcc_jit_context_new_unary_op): Check result_type to be a
numeric type.
* libgccjit.c (gcc_jit_context_new_binary_op): Fix nit in error message.
gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog
2019-07-04 Andrea Corallo <andrea.corallo@arm.com>
* jit.dg/test-error-gcc_jit_context_new_unary_op-bad-res-type.c:
New testcase.
* jit.dg/test-error-gcc_jit_context_new_binary_op-bad-res-type.c:
Fix nit in error message.
[-- Warning: decoded text below may be mangled, UTF-8 assumed --]
[-- Attachment #2: unary_op_check_result_type.patch --]
[-- Type: text/x-diff; name="unary_op_check_result_type.patch", Size: 3266 bytes --]
diff --git a/gcc/jit/libgccjit.c b/gcc/jit/libgccjit.c
index 23e83e2..bea840f 100644
--- a/gcc/jit/libgccjit.c
+++ b/gcc/jit/libgccjit.c
@@ -1336,6 +1336,12 @@ gcc_jit_context_new_unary_op (gcc_jit_context *ctxt,
"unrecognized value for enum gcc_jit_unary_op: %i",
op);
RETURN_NULL_IF_FAIL (result_type, ctxt, loc, "NULL result_type");
+ RETURN_NULL_IF_FAIL_PRINTF3 (
+ result_type->is_numeric (), ctxt, loc,
+ "gcc_jit_unary_op %i with operand %s "
+ "has non-numeric result_type: %s",
+ op, rvalue->get_debug_string (),
+ result_type->get_debug_string ());
RETURN_NULL_IF_FAIL (rvalue, ctxt, loc, "NULL rvalue");
return (gcc_jit_rvalue *)ctxt->new_unary_op (loc, op, result_type, rvalue);
@@ -1388,7 +1394,7 @@ gcc_jit_context_new_binary_op (gcc_jit_context *ctxt,
RETURN_NULL_IF_FAIL_PRINTF4 (
result_type->is_numeric (), ctxt, loc,
"gcc_jit_binary_op %i with operands a: %s b: %s "
- "has non numeric result_type: %s",
+ "has non-numeric result_type: %s",
op, a->get_debug_string (), b->get_debug_string (),
result_type->get_debug_string ());
diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/jit.dg/test-error-gcc_jit_context_new_binary_op-bad-res-type.c b/gcc/testsuite/jit.dg/test-error-gcc_jit_context_new_binary_op-bad-res-type.c
index abadc9f..d2a0963 100644
--- a/gcc/testsuite/jit.dg/test-error-gcc_jit_context_new_binary_op-bad-res-type.c
+++ b/gcc/testsuite/jit.dg/test-error-gcc_jit_context_new_binary_op-bad-res-type.c
@@ -36,6 +36,6 @@ verify_code (gcc_jit_context *ctxt, gcc_jit_result *result)
/* Verify that the correct error message was emitted. */
CHECK_STRING_VALUE (gcc_jit_context_get_first_error (ctxt),
"gcc_jit_context_new_binary_op: gcc_jit_binary_op 1 with"
- " operands a: (int)1 b: (int)2 has non numeric "
+ " operands a: (int)1 b: (int)2 has non-numeric "
"result_type: void *");
}
diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/jit.dg/test-error-gcc_jit_context_new_unary_op-bad-res-type.c b/gcc/testsuite/jit.dg/test-error-gcc_jit_context_new_unary_op-bad-res-type.c
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..f547974
--- /dev/null
+++ b/gcc/testsuite/jit.dg/test-error-gcc_jit_context_new_unary_op-bad-res-type.c
@@ -0,0 +1,37 @@
+#include <stdlib.h>
+#include <stdio.h>
+
+#include "libgccjit.h"
+
+#include "harness.h"
+
+/* Try to create an unary operator with invalid result type. */
+
+void
+create_code (gcc_jit_context *ctxt, void *user_data)
+{
+ gcc_jit_type *int_type =
+ gcc_jit_context_get_type (ctxt, GCC_JIT_TYPE_INT);
+ gcc_jit_type *void_ptr_type =
+ gcc_jit_context_get_type (ctxt, GCC_JIT_TYPE_VOID_PTR);
+
+ gcc_jit_context_new_unary_op (
+ ctxt,
+ NULL,
+ GCC_JIT_UNARY_OP_LOGICAL_NEGATE,
+ void_ptr_type,
+ gcc_jit_context_new_rvalue_from_int (ctxt,
+ int_type,
+ 1));
+}
+
+void
+verify_code (gcc_jit_context *ctxt, gcc_jit_result *result)
+{
+ CHECK_VALUE (result, NULL);
+
+ /* Verify that the correct error message was emitted. */
+ CHECK_STRING_VALUE (gcc_jit_context_get_first_error (ctxt),
+ "gcc_jit_context_new_unary_op: gcc_jit_unary_op 2 with "
+ "operand (int)1 has non-numeric result_type: void *");
+}
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH][gcc] libgccjit: check result_type in gcc_jit_context_new_unary_op
2019-01-01 0:00 ` David Malcolm
@ 2019-01-01 0:00 ` Andrea Corallo
0 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Andrea Corallo @ 2019-01-01 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: David Malcolm; +Cc: Andrea Corallo, jit, gcc-patches, nd
David Malcolm writes:
> On Thu, 2019-07-18 at 14:20 +0000, Andrea Corallo wrote:
>> Hi all,
>> I've just realized that what we has been done recently for
>> gcc_jit_context_new_binary_op should be done also for the unary
>> version.
>> This patch checks at record time for the result type of
>> gcc_jit_context_new_unary_op to be numeric type plus add a testcase
>> for the new check.
>>
>> make check-jit runs clean
>>
>> Is it okay for trunk?
>
> Thanks - this is good for trunk.
>
> Dave
Thanks,
last version committed as r273700
Bests
Andrea
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2019-07-22 15:46 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2019-01-01 0:00 [PATCH][gcc] libgccjit: check result_type in gcc_jit_context_new_unary_op Andrea Corallo
2019-01-01 0:00 ` David Malcolm
2019-01-01 0:00 ` Andrea Corallo
2019-01-01 0:00 ` David Malcolm
2019-01-01 0:00 ` Andrea Corallo
2019-01-01 0:00 ` Andrea Corallo
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).