On Wed, Feb 17, 2021 at 01:27:55PM -0700, Martin Sebor wrote:
Not in this patch, but I've looked at what maxobjsize is and wonder why
the roundtrip tree -> HOST_WIDE_INT -> offset_int:
const offset_int maxobjsize = tree_to_shwi (max_object_size ());
Can't it be
const offset_int maxobjsize = wi::to_offset (max_object_size ());
?
> I'm pretty sure that's because wide_int doesn't have division and
> I assumed offset_int didn't either when I originally wrote the code.
> I've changed it to use division.
wide_int does have division, otherwise offset_int wouldn't have it either.
One needs to choose if one wants signed or unsigned division, operator /
does signed, one can use wi::{,s,u}div_{trunc,ceil,round} etc.
As maxobjsize shouldn't have MSB set, it probably doesn't matter if one
uses signed or unsigned division.
> + tree nelts = array_type_nelts (reftype);
> + if (integer_all_onesp (nelts))
> + /* Zero length array. */
> + arrbounds[1] = 0;
Ok then.
> + else
> {
> - tree bnds[] = { TYPE_MIN_VALUE (dom), TYPE_MAX_VALUE (dom) };
> - if (TREE_CODE (arg) == COMPONENT_REF)
> - {
> - offset_int size = maxobjsize;
> - if (tree fldsize = component_ref_size (arg))
> - size = wi::to_offset (fldsize);
> - arrbounds[1] = wi::lrshift (size, eltsizelog2);
> - }
> - else if (array_at_struct_end_p (arg) || !bnds[0] || !bnds[1])
> - arrbounds[1] = wi::lrshift (maxobjsize, eltsizelog2);
> + tree esz = TYPE_SIZE_UNIT (TREE_TYPE (reftype));
> + if (TREE_CODE (esz) == INTEGER_CST)
> + /* Array element is either not a VLA or it's a VLA with
> + zero size (such as int A[n][n][0];). */
> + eltsize = wi::to_offset (esz);
> else
> - arrbounds[1] = (wi::to_offset (bnds[1]) - wi::to_offset
> (bnds[0])
> - + 1) * eltsize;
> + return false;
> +
> + if (TREE_CODE (nelts) == INTEGER_CST)
> + arrbounds[1] = (wi::to_offset (nelts) + 1) * eltsize;
> + else if (eltsize == 0)
> + arrbounds[1] = 0;
Doesn't arrbounds[1] == 0 mean there will be warnings for any accesses?
For eltsize == 0 I think you shouldn't warn when nelts isn't known,
instead of always warning, arr[100000000] will have the same address as
arr[0] ...
Otherwise LGTM.
Jakub
