From: mike stump <mrs@windriver.com>
To: gdr@codesourcery.com, paulus@samba.org
Cc: dewar@gnat.com, gcc@gcc.gnu.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
trini@kernel.crashing.org, velco@fadata.bg
Subject: Re: [PATCH] C undefined behavior fix
Date: Mon, 7 Jan 2002 11:36:45 -0800 (PST) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <200201071936.LAA12038@kankakee.wrs.com> (raw)
> From: Paul Mackerras <paulus@samba.org>
> Date: Mon, 7 Jan 2002 08:59:47 +1100 (EST)
> To: Gabriel Dos Reis <gdr@codesourcery.com>
> > Personnally, I don't have any sentiment against the assembler
> > solution. Dewar said it was unnecessarily un-portable, but that the
> > construct by itself *is* already unportable.
> I assume that what we're talking about is using an asm statement like:
> asm("" : "=r" (x) : "0" (y));
Ick! No, that's horrible.
char buf[1024];
#define hide(x) ({ void *vp = x; asm ("" : "+r" (vp)); vp; })
main() {
strcpy(buf, hide("eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeelksdlkjasdlkjasdlkjasdaaaaaaaaaa"+20));
}
Perfectly clear, simple, doesn't burn regs and so on. In fact, even
the assembly file doesn't have any extraneous output, cool.
> My main problem with this is that it doesn't actually solve the
> problem AFAICS.
It does for now. It will for the next 10 years, my guess. volatile
will solve it longer, at some performance penalty, if you prefer.
> Dereferencing x is still undefined according to the rules in the gcc
> manual.
? So what? Pragmatically, for now, it does what the user wants. By
the time we break it, we'll probably have enough intelligence in the
compiler to figure out what they were doing and still not break it.
> I would prefer a solution that will last, rather than one which
> relies on details of the current gcc implementation.
Then move the bits to the right address before you execute the C code
and code the thing that moves the bits in assembly.
> - it is hard to read; it wouldn't be obvious to someone who doesn't
> know the details of gcc asm syntax what it is doing or why
See the comment just above.
> - it is a statement, which makes it less convenient to use than an
> expression
? In my example, it is an expression.
> - it requires an extra dummy variable declaration.
Mine doesn't.
> But my main objection is that I don't have any assurance that it
> actually solves the problem in a lasting way.
The code only in that subset of C that is well defined and only use
semantics that have mandated behavior.
next reply other threads:[~2002-01-07 19:37 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 202+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2002-01-07 19:36 mike stump [this message]
2002-01-07 21:21 ` [PATCH] C undefined behavior fix Theodore Tso
2002-01-08 0:19 ` Paul Mackerras
2002-01-08 1:02 ` Richard Henderson
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2002-01-10 19:01 Bernard Dautrevaux
2002-01-10 12:18 dewar
2002-01-10 12:37 ` Erik Trulsson
2002-01-10 15:27 ` Florian Weimer
2002-01-10 9:03 Bernard Dautrevaux
2002-01-10 10:40 ` David Weinehall
2002-01-10 4:33 dewar
2002-01-10 2:16 dewar
2002-01-10 1:22 dewar
2002-01-10 1:21 dewar
2002-01-10 4:37 ` Tim Hollebeek
2002-01-09 21:54 dewar
2002-01-09 20:32 dewar
2002-01-09 21:43 ` Paul Koning
2002-01-09 20:08 dewar
2002-01-09 19:53 mike stump
2002-01-09 20:12 ` Paul Koning
2002-01-09 10:42 dewar
2002-01-09 10:41 Bernard Dautrevaux
2002-01-09 21:59 ` Gérard Roudier
2002-01-09 10:40 dewar
2002-01-09 9:06 Bernard Dautrevaux
2002-01-09 9:25 ` Bernd Petrovitsch
2002-01-09 2:18 dewar
2002-01-09 2:13 dewar
2002-01-09 1:51 mike stump
2002-01-09 1:19 dewar
2002-01-09 0:51 dewar
2002-01-08 11:12 Bernard Dautrevaux
2002-01-11 9:52 ` Horst von Brand
2002-01-08 9:44 Bernard Dautrevaux
2002-01-08 11:44 ` 'jtv'
2002-01-08 0:16 mike stump
2002-01-08 11:33 ` jtv
2002-01-07 23:46 mike stump
2002-01-07 23:20 dewar
2002-01-07 23:15 dewar
2002-01-07 23:12 dewar
2002-01-07 23:11 dewar
2002-01-07 22:56 mike stump
2002-01-07 22:26 Tim McDaniel
2002-01-07 19:18 mike stump
2002-01-07 19:17 Bernard Dautrevaux
2002-01-07 18:38 mike stump
2002-01-07 13:29 Bernard Dautrevaux
2002-01-07 13:24 Bernard Dautrevaux
2002-01-07 21:49 ` jtv
2002-01-07 22:28 ` Tim Hollebeek
2002-01-07 22:16 ` jtv
2002-01-08 0:27 ` J.A. Magallon
2002-01-08 11:41 ` jtv
2002-01-08 12:36 ` Alexandre Oliva
2002-01-08 12:58 ` jtv
2002-01-09 19:47 ` Gérard Roudier
2002-01-09 20:44 ` jtv
2002-01-09 23:49 ` J.A. Magallon
2002-01-10 0:19 ` Peter Barada
2002-01-10 1:47 ` Fergus Henderson
2002-01-10 15:30 ` Peter Barada
2002-01-10 10:13 ` Matthias Benkmann
2002-01-10 10:44 ` Bernd Petrovitsch
2002-01-06 19:32 dewar
2002-01-06 19:29 dewar
2002-01-06 19:29 dewar
2002-01-06 18:37 mike stump
2002-01-06 18:24 mike stump
2002-01-06 20:37 ` Gabriel Dos Reis
2002-01-06 21:59 ` Paul Mackerras
2002-01-06 22:19 ` Jakub Jelinek
2002-01-07 0:09 ` Tom Rini
2002-01-07 1:40 ` Alexandre Oliva
2002-01-06 18:20 mike stump
2002-01-06 16:22 dewar
2002-01-06 16:39 ` Alan Cox
2002-01-06 19:27 ` Laurent Guerby
2002-01-06 19:43 ` Alan Cox
2002-01-06 13:43 dewar
2002-01-06 13:55 ` Laurent Guerby
2002-01-06 13:41 dewar
2002-01-06 16:58 ` Gabriel Dos Reis
2002-01-06 13:16 dewar
2002-01-06 13:22 ` Gabriel Dos Reis
2002-01-06 13:07 dewar
2002-01-06 13:05 dewar
2002-01-06 13:41 ` Laurent Guerby
2002-01-06 7:56 mike stump
2002-01-06 4:26 dewar
2002-01-06 5:32 ` Paul Mackerras
2002-01-06 11:09 ` Momchil Velikov
2002-01-06 0:52 dewar
2002-01-04 22:43 dewar
2002-01-06 3:40 ` Paul Mackerras
2002-01-04 12:15 dewar
2002-01-04 12:14 dewar
2002-01-03 13:28 dewar
2002-01-04 8:38 ` Florian Weimer
2002-01-04 11:35 ` Joseph S. Myers
2002-01-05 19:25 ` jkl
2002-01-05 19:37 ` Joseph S. Myers
2002-01-05 20:06 ` jkl
2002-01-05 21:42 ` Joseph S. Myers
2002-01-06 4:09 ` Paul Mackerras
2002-01-05 20:01 ` Florian Weimer
2002-01-05 20:17 ` jkl
2002-01-05 20:51 ` Florian Weimer
2002-01-03 12:51 dewar
2002-01-03 10:35 Bernard Dautrevaux
2002-01-03 10:05 Bernard Dautrevaux
2002-01-03 10:49 ` Paul Mackerras
2002-01-03 11:59 ` Lars Brinkhoff
2002-01-03 23:53 ` Paul Mackerras
2002-01-04 9:52 ` Lars Brinkhoff
2002-01-05 6:45 ` Paul Mackerras
2002-01-06 0:20 ` Lars Brinkhoff
2002-01-09 9:28 ` Fergus Henderson
2002-01-09 10:58 ` Gabriel Dos Reis
2002-01-03 0:49 dewar
2002-01-03 0:12 dewar
2002-01-03 0:32 ` jtv
2002-01-06 19:37 ` Alexandre Oliva
2002-01-02 23:53 dewar
2002-01-02 23:59 ` Joe Buck
2002-01-03 3:12 ` Paul Mackerras
2002-01-03 15:45 ` Joe Buck
2002-01-02 17:40 Petr Vandrovec
2002-01-02 22:24 ` David Woodhouse
2002-01-02 22:39 ` Joe Buck
2002-01-02 22:59 ` David Woodhouse
2002-01-03 18:44 ` Alexandre Oliva
2002-01-02 10:02 Bernard Dautrevaux
2002-01-02 23:02 ` Paul Mackerras
2002-01-02 23:27 ` Momchil Velikov
2002-01-01 23:03 Momchil Velikov
2002-01-01 23:43 ` Tom Rini
2002-01-02 6:54 ` Momchil Velikov
2002-01-02 15:39 ` Tom Rini
2002-01-02 15:50 ` Jakub Jelinek
2002-01-02 16:45 ` Paul Koning
2002-01-02 22:56 ` Paul Mackerras
2002-01-02 23:37 ` Momchil Velikov
2002-01-03 2:51 ` Paul Mackerras
2002-01-03 6:29 ` law
2002-01-03 13:16 ` Lars Brinkhoff
2002-01-04 9:05 ` Florian Weimer
2002-01-04 22:14 ` Paul Mackerras
2002-01-02 14:56 ` Joseph S. Myers
2002-01-02 10:29 ` Florian Weimer
2002-01-02 10:41 ` Momchil Velikov
2002-01-02 13:11 ` Jakub Jelinek
2002-01-02 15:54 ` Tom Rini
2002-01-02 11:28 ` Aaron Lehmann
2002-01-02 11:40 ` Momchil Velikov
2002-01-02 15:59 ` Tom Rini
2002-01-02 11:48 ` Alan Cox
2002-01-02 19:09 ` Tom Rini
2002-01-02 20:13 ` Joe Buck
2002-01-02 20:42 ` Tom Rini
2002-01-02 21:36 ` Richard Henderson
2002-01-02 22:05 ` Tom Rini
2002-01-02 22:23 ` jtv
2002-01-02 23:12 ` Tom Rini
2002-01-02 23:45 ` jtv
2002-01-03 0:01 ` Tom Rini
2002-01-03 0:07 ` Richard Henderson
2002-01-03 0:16 ` Tom Rini
2002-01-03 1:12 ` Richard Henderson
2002-01-03 0:20 ` jtv
2002-01-03 2:33 ` Paul Mackerras
2002-01-03 8:32 ` Richard Henderson
2002-01-03 10:10 ` Paul Mackerras
2002-01-03 22:41 ` Tim Hollebeek
2002-01-04 8:48 ` Florian Weimer
2002-01-03 10:03 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2002-01-03 0:25 ` Alan Cox
2002-01-03 0:35 ` David Woodhouse
2002-01-03 2:10 ` Tom Rini
2002-01-03 22:39 ` Pavel Machek
2002-01-04 9:29 ` Paul Mackerras
2002-01-03 15:46 ` Edgar Toernig
2002-01-03 16:48 ` Momchil Velikov
2002-01-03 17:13 ` jtv
2002-01-03 21:26 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2002-01-02 22:27 ` Richard Henderson
2002-01-02 22:35 ` Tom Rini
2002-01-02 22:44 ` Richard Henderson
2002-01-02 22:50 ` Tom Rini
2002-01-03 22:40 ` Pavel Machek
2002-01-04 8:42 ` Richard Henderson
2002-01-02 23:11 ` Paul Mackerras
2002-01-02 23:26 ` Tom Rini
2002-01-02 23:28 ` Momchil Velikov
2002-01-02 23:34 ` Tom Rini
2002-01-03 0:19 ` jtv
2002-01-03 0:29 ` Tom Rini
2002-01-03 1:03 ` jtv
2002-01-03 1:17 ` Tom Rini
2002-01-03 17:44 ` jtv
2002-01-04 8:42 ` 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=200201071936.LAA12038@kankakee.wrs.com \
--to=mrs@windriver.com \
--cc=dewar@gnat.com \
--cc=gcc@gcc.gnu.org \
--cc=gdr@codesourcery.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=paulus@samba.org \
--cc=trini@kernel.crashing.org \
--cc=velco@fadata.bg \
/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