This is the mail archive of the
libc-alpha@sourceware.org
mailing list for the glibc project.
Re: [PATCH] string/stratcliff.c: Replace int with size_t [BZ #21982]
- From: "H.J. Lu" <hjl dot tools at gmail dot com>
- To: Stefan Liebler <stli at linux dot vnet dot ibm dot com>, Libc-stable Mailing List <libc-stable at sourceware dot org>
- Cc: GNU C Library <libc-alpha at sourceware dot org>
- Date: Mon, 11 Sep 2017 08:46:01 -0700
- Subject: Re: [PATCH] string/stratcliff.c: Replace int with size_t [BZ #21982]
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <20170820171713.GA19531@gmail.com> <25604b34-7afb-7007-4ea8-3add9963d4b4@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <CAMe9rOq=oRRMrLg1=mJFcBszKUDGkPOgQ=dGqgQ9p9Vvqm=tkg@mail.gmail.com> <b3944bf8-07a2-6460-a564-f973db7ea7fa@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <CAMe9rOrBY3HVR1Quzcrg_Exj1VZCqX21wiwwqybeesToqZ2L9g@mail.gmail.com> <10fd8eb0-0f53-9d4b-dcd2-694a1878c994@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <CAMe9rOppYs6+kPif2++WrF3sAcphhWgw_bf04EVDp7r5fqO_Lg@mail.gmail.com> <3cf66cda-dcdf-1e56-d0d9-1f015d486692@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <CAMe9rOrzLS5LnRWdrir_Uyn_UPicwNv+L-6S4Bc_Z=ErVbD=ew@mail.gmail.com> <CAMe9rOojp147z6VxDwSKjnfFeaJBKu2gMoDsTcF82AGts0AFkA@mail.gmail.com>
On Thu, Sep 7, 2017 at 9:20 AM, H.J. Lu <hjl.tools@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 23, 2017 at 7:49 AM, H.J. Lu <hjl.tools@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Tue, Aug 22, 2017 at 7:56 AM, Stefan Liebler <stli@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
>>> On 08/22/2017 02:43 PM, H.J. Lu wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Aug 22, 2017 at 5:07 AM, Stefan Liebler <stli@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> On 08/22/2017 01:05 AM, H.J. Lu wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Mon, Aug 21, 2017 at 8:41 AM, Stefan Liebler
>>>>>> <stli@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 08/21/2017 04:53 PM, H.J. Lu wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Mon, Aug 21, 2017 at 6:48 AM, Stefan Liebler
>>>>>>>> <stli@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On 08/20/2017 07:17 PM, H.J. Lu wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Fix GCC 7 errors when string/stratcliff.c is compiled with -O3:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> stratcliff.c: In function ‘do_test’:
>>>>>>>>>> cc1: error: assuming signed overflow does not occur when assuming
>>>>>>>>>> that
>>>>>>>>>> (X
>>>>>>>>>> - c) <= X is always true [-Werror=strict-overflow]
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> OK for master?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> H.J.
>>>>>>>>>> ---
>>>>>>>>>> [BZ #21982]
>>>>>>>>>> * string/stratcliff.c (do_test): Declare size, nchars,
>>>>>>>>>> inner,
>>>>>>>>>> middle and outer with size_t instead of int. Repleace %d
>>>>>>>>>> with
>>>>>>>>>> %Zd in printf.
>>>>>>>>>> ---
>>>>>>>>>> string/stratcliff.c | 72
>>>>>>>>>> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++---------------------------
>>>>>>>>>> 1 file changed, 36 insertions(+), 36 deletions(-)
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> diff --git a/string/stratcliff.c b/string/stratcliff.c
>>>>>>>>>> index e28b0c5058..ae780379cb 100644
>>>>>>>>>> --- a/string/stratcliff.c
>>>>>>>>>> +++ b/string/stratcliff.c
>>>>>>>>>> @@ -58,8 +58,8 @@
>>>>>>>>>> int
>>>>>>>>>> do_test (void)
>>>>>>>>>> {
>>>>>>>>>> - int size = sysconf (_SC_PAGESIZE);
>>>>>>>>>> - int nchars = size / sizeof (CHAR);
>>>>>>>>>> + size_t size = sysconf (_SC_PAGESIZE);
>>>>>>>>>> + size_t nchars = size / sizeof (CHAR);
>>>>>>>>>> CHAR *adr;
>>>>>>>>>> CHAR *dest;
>>>>>>>>>> int result = 0;
>>>>>>>>>> @@ -80,7 +80,7 @@ do_test (void)
>>>>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>>>>> else
>>>>>>>>>> {
>>>>>>>>>> - int inner, middle, outer;
>>>>>>>>>> + size_t inner, middle, outer;
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> mprotect (adr, size, PROT_NONE);
>>>>>>>>>> mprotect (adr + 2 * nchars, size, PROT_NONE);
>>>>>>>>>> @@ -101,7 +101,7 @@ do_test (void)
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> if (STRLEN (&adr[outer]) != (size_t) (inner -
>>>>>>>>>> outer))
>>>>>>>>>> {
>>>>>>>>>> - printf ("%s flunked for outer = %d, inner = %d\n",
>>>>>>>>>> + printf ("%s flunked for outer = %Zd, inner =
>>>>>>>>>> %Zd\n",
>>>>>>>>>> STRINGIFY (STRLEN), outer, inner);
>>>>>>>>>> result = 1;
>>>>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>>>>> {
>>>>>>>>>> - printf ("%s flunked for outer = %d, middle =
>>>>>>>>>> %d\n",
>>>>>>>>>> + printf ("%s flunked for outer = %Zd, middle =
>>>>>>>>>> %Zd\n",
>>>>>>>>>> STRINGIFY (rawmemchr), outer, middle);
>>>>>>>>>> result = 1;
>>>>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>>>>> Hi H.J. Lu,
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I've applied your patch and the warnings does not occur anymore on
>>>>>>>>> s390.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Great.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> The outer loops of the string tests are all using the following:
>>>>>>>>> size_t nchars, outer;
>>>>>>>>> for (outer = nchars - 1; outer >= MAX (0, nchars - 128); --outer)
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I think we can assume, that nchars is always > 128 as it is derived
>>>>>>>>> by
>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>> pagesize.
>>>>>>>>> But if nchars would be equal to 128, this would result in an infinite
>>>>>>>>> loop
>>>>>>>>> (outer >= 0)?
>>>>>>>>> If nchars would be less than 128, the tests would be skipped.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Should we add a check that nchars > 128 at the beginning and replace
>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>> "MAX (0, nchars - 128)" with only "nchars - 128"?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> This is a separate issue beyond BZ #21982.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Your patch is introducing this behaviour.
>>>>>>> Before your patch, nchars and outer was an int and the
>>>>>>> for-loop-condition
>>>>>>> "outer >= MAX (0, nchars - 128)" does not lead to an infinite loop or
>>>>>>> to
>>>>>>> skipping the test if nchars <= 128.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> How about this patch?
>>>>>>
>>>>> This solves the cases if nchars < 128.
>>>>> But if nchars == 128, then the condition of the for-loop is "size_t outer
>>>>> >=
>>>>> 0", which is always true.
>>>>>
>>>>> Could we check once if nchars > 128 and exit the test with an error if
>>>>> nchars is <= 128?
>>>>> Are there architectures where the page size is < 4096?
>>>>> Or where wchar_t > 4byte?
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Here is the updated patch. I added
>>>>
>>>> if (outer == 0)
>>>> break;
>>>>
>>>> at the end of loop.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Okay. This fixes the case nchars == 128.
>>> I've retested this patch on s390x with gcc 7 -O3 and the warnings does not
>>> occur anymore.
>>
>> I am checking it in shortly.
>>
>
> I'd like to backport it to 2.25 and 2.26 branches. Any comments?
>
I am checking it in now.
--
H.J.