public inbox for libc-alpha@sourceware.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Joseph Myers <joseph@codesourcery.com>
To: <libc-alpha@sourceware.org>
Subject: Disable -Waggressive-loop-optimizations warnings in tst-dynarray.c
Date: Wed, 27 Oct 2021 16:56:34 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.22.394.2110271656160.1681686@digraph.polyomino.org.uk> (raw)

My build-many-glibcs.py bot shows -Waggressive-loop-optimizations
errors building the glibc testsuite for 32-bit architectures with GCC
mainline, which seem to have appeared between GCC commits
4abc0c196b10251dc80d0743ba9e8ab3e56c61ed and
d8edfadfc7a9795b65177a50ce44fd348858e844:

In function 'dynarray_long_noscratch_resize',
    inlined from 'test_long_overflow' at tst-dynarray.c:489:5,
    inlined from 'do_test' at tst-dynarray.c:571:3:
../malloc/dynarray-skeleton.c:391:36: error: iteration 1073741823 invokes undefined behavior [-Werror=aggressive-loop-optimizations]
  391 |             DYNARRAY_ELEMENT_INIT (&list->u.dynarray_header.array[i]);
tst-dynarray.c:39:37: note: in definition of macro 'DYNARRAY_ELEMENT_INIT'
   39 | #define DYNARRAY_ELEMENT_INIT(e) (*(e) = 23)
      |                                     ^
In file included from tst-dynarray.c:42:
../malloc/dynarray-skeleton.c:389:37: note: within this loop
  389 |         for (size_t i = old_size; i < size; ++i)
      |                                   ~~^~~~~~
In function 'dynarray_long_resize',
    inlined from 'test_long_overflow' at tst-dynarray.c:479:5,
    inlined from 'do_test' at tst-dynarray.c:571:3:
../malloc/dynarray-skeleton.c:391:36: error: iteration 1073741823 invokes undefined behavior [-Werror=aggressive-loop-optimizations]
  391 |             DYNARRAY_ELEMENT_INIT (&list->u.dynarray_header.array[i]);
tst-dynarray.c:27:37: note: in definition of macro 'DYNARRAY_ELEMENT_INIT'
   27 | #define DYNARRAY_ELEMENT_INIT(e) (*(e) = 17)
      |                                     ^
In file included from tst-dynarray.c:28:
../malloc/dynarray-skeleton.c:389:37: note: within this loop
  389 |         for (size_t i = old_size; i < size; ++i)
      |                                   ~~^~~~~~

I don't know what GCC change made these errors appear, or why they
only appear for 32-bit architectures.  However, the warnings appear to
be both true (that iteration would indeed involve undefined behavior
if executed) and useless in this particular case (that iteration is
never executed, because the allocation size overflows and so the
allocation fails - but the check for allocation size overflow is in a
separate source file and so can't be seen by the compiler when
compiling this test).  So use the DIAG_* macros to disable
-Waggressive-loop-optimizations around the calls in question to
dynarray_long_resize and dynarray_long_noscratch_resize in this test.

Tested with build-many-glibcs.py (GCC mainline) for arm-linux-gnueabi,
where it restores a clean testsuite build.

diff --git a/malloc/tst-dynarray.c b/malloc/tst-dynarray.c
index c33505711f..955fab696c 100644
--- a/malloc/tst-dynarray.c
+++ b/malloc/tst-dynarray.c
@@ -20,6 +20,7 @@
 
 #include <errno.h>
 #include <stdint.h>
+#include <libc-diag.h>
 
 #define DYNARRAY_STRUCT dynarray_long
 #define DYNARRAY_ELEMENT long
@@ -476,8 +477,15 @@ test_long_overflow (void)
     struct dynarray_long dyn;
     dynarray_long_init (&dyn);
     errno = EINVAL;
+    DIAG_PUSH_NEEDS_COMMENT;
+    /* GCC 12 (on 32-bit platforms) warns that after inlining, a loop
+       iteration would invoke undefined behavior.  That loop iteration
+       can never be executed because an allocation of this size must
+       fail.  */
+    DIAG_IGNORE_NEEDS_COMMENT (12, "-Waggressive-loop-optimizations");
     TEST_VERIFY (!dynarray_long_resize
                  (&dyn, (SIZE_MAX / sizeof (long)) + 1));
+    DIAG_POP_NEEDS_COMMENT;
     TEST_VERIFY (errno == ENOMEM);
     TEST_VERIFY (dynarray_long_has_failed (&dyn));
   }
@@ -486,8 +494,15 @@ test_long_overflow (void)
     struct dynarray_long_noscratch dyn;
     dynarray_long_noscratch_init (&dyn);
     errno = EINVAL;
+    DIAG_PUSH_NEEDS_COMMENT;
+    /* GCC 12 (on 32-bit platforms) warns that after inlining, a loop
+       iteration would invoke undefined behavior.  That loop iteration
+       can never be executed because an allocation of this size must
+       fail.  */
+    DIAG_IGNORE_NEEDS_COMMENT (12, "-Waggressive-loop-optimizations");
     TEST_VERIFY (!dynarray_long_noscratch_resize
                  (&dyn, (SIZE_MAX / sizeof (long)) + 1));
+    DIAG_POP_NEEDS_COMMENT;
     TEST_VERIFY (errno == ENOMEM);
     TEST_VERIFY (dynarray_long_noscratch_has_failed (&dyn));
   }

-- 
Joseph S. Myers
joseph@codesourcery.com

             reply	other threads:[~2021-10-27 16:56 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2021-10-27 16:56 Joseph Myers [this message]
2021-10-29  9:04 ` Florian Weimer

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.DEB.2.22.394.2110271656160.1681686@digraph.polyomino.org.uk \
    --to=joseph@codesourcery.com \
    --cc=libc-alpha@sourceware.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).