[PATCH] Verify that context of local DECLs is the current function

Richard Biener richard.guenther@gmail.com
Wed Apr 27 12:40:00 GMT 2016


On Wed, Apr 27, 2016 at 2:23 PM, Martin Jambor <mjambor@suse.cz> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Tue, Apr 26, 2016 at 10:58:22AM +0200, Richard Biener wrote:
>> On Mon, Apr 25, 2016 at 3:22 PM, Martin Jambor <mjambor@suse.cz> wrote:
>> > Hi,
>> >
>> > the patch below moves an assert from expand_expr_real_1 to gimple
>> > verification.  It triggers when we do a sloppy job outlining stuff
>> > from one function to another (or perhaps inlining too) and leave in
>> > the IL of a function a local declaration that belongs to a different
>> > function.
>> >
>> > Like I wrote above, such cases usually ICE in expand anyway, but I
>> > think it is worth bailing out sooner, if nothing because bugs like PR
>> > 70348 would not be assigned to me ;-) ...well, actually, I found this
>> > helpful when working on OpenMP gridification.
>> >
>> > In the process, I think that the verifier would not catch a
>> > SSA_NAME_IN_FREE_LIST when such an SSA_NAME is a base of a MEM_REF so
>> > I added that check too.
>> >
>> > Bootstrapped and tested on x86_64-linux, OK for trunk?
>> >
>> > Thanks,
>> >
>> > Martin
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > 2016-04-21  Martin Jambor  <mjambor@suse.cz>
>> >
>> >         * tree-cfg.c (verify_var_parm_result_decl): New function.
>> >         (verify_address): Call it on PARM_DECL bases.
>> >         (verify_expr): Likewise, also verify SSA_NAME bases of MEM_REFs.
>> > ---
>> >  gcc/tree-cfg.c | 47 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>> >  1 file changed, 47 insertions(+)
>> >
>> > diff --git a/gcc/tree-cfg.c b/gcc/tree-cfg.c
>> > index 3385164..c917967 100644
>> > --- a/gcc/tree-cfg.c
>> > +++ b/gcc/tree-cfg.c
>> > @@ -2764,6 +2764,23 @@ gimple_split_edge (edge edge_in)
>> >    return new_bb;
>> >  }
>> >
>> > +/* Verify that a VAR, PARM_DECL or RESULT_DECL T is from the current function,
>> > +   and if not, return true.  If it is, return false.  */
>> > +
>> > +static bool
>> > +verify_var_parm_result_decl (tree t)
>> > +{
>> > +  tree context = decl_function_context (t);
>> > +  if (context != cfun->decl
>> > +      && !SCOPE_FILE_SCOPE_P (context)
>> > +      && !TREE_STATIC (t)
>> > +      && !DECL_EXTERNAL (t))
>> > +    {
>> > +      error ("Local declaration from a different function");
>> > +      return true;
>> > +    }
>> > +  return NULL;
>> > +}
>> >
>> >  /* Verify properties of the address expression T with base object BASE.  */
>> >
>> > @@ -2798,6 +2815,8 @@ verify_address (tree t, tree base)
>> >         || TREE_CODE (base) == RESULT_DECL))
>> >      return NULL_TREE;
>> >
>> > +  if (verify_var_parm_result_decl (base))
>> > +    return base;
>>
>> Is that necessary?  We recurse after all, so ...
>>
>> >    if (DECL_GIMPLE_REG_P (base))
>> >      {
>> >        error ("DECL_GIMPLE_REG_P set on a variable with address taken");
>> > @@ -2834,6 +2853,13 @@ verify_expr (tree *tp, int *walk_subtrees, void *data ATTRIBUTE_UNUSED)
>> >         }
>> >        break;
>> >
>> > +    case PARM_DECL:
>> > +    case VAR_DECL:
>> > +    case RESULT_DECL:
>> > +      if (verify_var_parm_result_decl (t))
>> > +       return t;
>> > +      break;
>> > +
>>
>> ... should apply.
>
> I made that happen (see below)...
>
>>
>> >      case INDIRECT_REF:
>> >        error ("INDIRECT_REF in gimple IL");
>> >        return t;
>> > @@ -2852,9 +2878,25 @@ verify_expr (tree *tp, int *walk_subtrees, void *data ATTRIBUTE_UNUSED)
>> >           error ("invalid offset operand of MEM_REF");
>> >           return TREE_OPERAND (t, 1);
>> >         }
>> > +      if (TREE_CODE (x) == SSA_NAME)
>> > +       {
>> > +         if (SSA_NAME_IN_FREE_LIST (x))
>> > +           {
>> > +             error ("SSA name in freelist but still referenced");
>> > +             return x;
>> > +           }
>> > +         if (SSA_NAME_VAR (x))
>> > +           x = SSA_NAME_VAR (x);;
>> > +       }
>> > +      if ((TREE_CODE (x) == PARM_DECL
>> > +          || TREE_CODE (x) == VAR_DECL
>> > +          || TREE_CODE (x) == RESULT_DECL)
>> > +         && verify_var_parm_result_decl (x))
>> > +       return x;
>>
>> please instead try removing *walk_subtrees = 0 ...
>
> That unfortunately leads to the verifier complaining that DECLs which
> are in ADDR_EXPRs are not marked as addressable.  So I changed the
> code below
>
>>
>> >        if (TREE_CODE (x) == ADDR_EXPR
>> >           && (x = verify_address (x, TREE_OPERAND (x, 0))))
>> >         return x;
>
> to
>
>       if (TREE_CODE (x) == ADDR_EXPR)
>         {
>           tree va = verify_address (x, TREE_OPERAND (x, 0));
>           if (va)
>             return va;
>           x = TREE_OPERAND (x, 0);
>         }
>       walk_tree (&x, verify_expr, data, NULL);
>       *walk_subtrees = 0;
>       break;
>
>>
>> ... we only get some slight duplicate address verification here
>> (this copy is stronger than the ADDR_EXPR case).
>>
>> > +
>> >        *walk_subtrees = 0;
>> >        break;
>> >
>> > @@ -3010,6 +3052,11 @@ verify_expr (tree *tp, int *walk_subtrees, void *data ATTRIBUTE_UNUSED)
>> >
>> >           t = TREE_OPERAND (t, 0);
>> >         }
>> > +      if ((TREE_CODE (t) == PARM_DECL
>> > +          || TREE_CODE (t) == VAR_DECL
>> > +          || TREE_CODE (t) == RESULT_DECL)
>> > +         && verify_var_parm_result_decl (t))
>> > +       return t;
>>
>> Hmm.  I wonder if rather than replicating stuff everywhere we do not walk
>> subtrees we instead should walk the subtree we care about explicitely
>> via a walk_tree invocation.  Like in this case
>>
>>            walk_tree (&t, verify_expr, data);
>
> I was not sure whether you meant to do it for all or only some t
> tree-codes.  In the end I decided to call it for all of them, the
> bases of handled components are unlikely to be deep trees in any
> case.  But I can change that.
>
> In any event, below is the changed patch which also passes bootstrap
> and testing on x86_64-linux.  OK for trunk?

Ok.

Thanks,
Richard.

> Thanks,
>
> Martin
>
>
> 2016-04-26  Martin Jambor  <mjambor@suse.cz>
>
>         * tree-cfg.c (verify_expr): Verify that local declarations belong to
>         this function.  Call verify_expr on MEM_REFs and bases of other
>         handled_components.
>
> diff --git a/gcc/tree-cfg.c b/gcc/tree-cfg.c
> index 04e46fd..943bb39 100644
> --- a/gcc/tree-cfg.c
> +++ b/gcc/tree-cfg.c
> @@ -2834,6 +2834,22 @@ verify_expr (tree *tp, int *walk_subtrees, void *data ATTRIBUTE_UNUSED)
>         }
>        break;
>
> +    case PARM_DECL:
> +    case VAR_DECL:
> +    case RESULT_DECL:
> +      {
> +       tree context = decl_function_context (t);
> +       if (context != cfun->decl
> +           && !SCOPE_FILE_SCOPE_P (context)
> +           && !TREE_STATIC (t)
> +           && !DECL_EXTERNAL (t))
> +         {
> +           error ("Local declaration from a different function");
> +           return t;
> +         }
> +      }
> +      break;
> +
>      case INDIRECT_REF:
>        error ("INDIRECT_REF in gimple IL");
>        return t;
> @@ -2852,9 +2868,14 @@ verify_expr (tree *tp, int *walk_subtrees, void *data ATTRIBUTE_UNUSED)
>           error ("invalid offset operand of MEM_REF");
>           return TREE_OPERAND (t, 1);
>         }
> -      if (TREE_CODE (x) == ADDR_EXPR
> -         && (x = verify_address (x, TREE_OPERAND (x, 0))))
> -       return x;
> +      if (TREE_CODE (x) == ADDR_EXPR)
> +       {
> +         tree va = verify_address (x, TREE_OPERAND (x, 0));
> +         if (va)
> +           return va;
> +         x = TREE_OPERAND (x, 0);
> +       }
> +      walk_tree (&x, verify_expr, data, NULL);
>        *walk_subtrees = 0;
>        break;
>
> @@ -3016,6 +3037,7 @@ verify_expr (tree *tp, int *walk_subtrees, void *data ATTRIBUTE_UNUSED)
>           error ("invalid reference prefix");
>           return t;
>         }
> +      walk_tree (&t, verify_expr, data, NULL);
>        *walk_subtrees = 0;
>        break;
>      case PLUS_EXPR:



More information about the Gcc-patches mailing list