On 03/07/2017 03:53 PM, Richard Biener wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 7, 2017 at 3:48 PM, Martin Liška <mli...@suse.cz> wrote:
>> On 03/07/2017 11:17 AM, Rainer Orth wrote:
>>> marxin <mli...@suse.cz> writes:
>>>
>>>> diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/pr79769.C
>>>> b/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/pr79769.C
>>>> new file mode 100644
>>>> index 00000000000..f9223db1b2d
>>>> --- /dev/null
>>>> +++ b/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/pr79769.C
>>>> @@ -0,0 +1,4 @@
>>>> +/* { dg-do compile { target { ! x32 } } } */
>>>> +/* { dg-options "-fcheck-pointer-bounds -mmpx -mabi=ms" } */
>>>
>>> ... and again: make this x86-only.
>>>
>>> Rainer
>>>
>>
>> Thanks. I'm sending v2 of the patch.
>
> Hmm, not sure why we should handle REAL_CST here explicitely for example.
>
> Why not, instead of internal_error in the default: case do
>
> bounds = chkp_get_invalid_op_bounds ();
Because chkp_get_invalid_op_bounds() returns bounds that are always valid and
as it's
security extension, I would be strict here in order to not handle something
that can bypass
the checking.
>
> there? For the testcase why do we invoke chkp_find_bounds_1 on sth that is
> a REAL_CST for example?
It's called when setting bounds in a call expr:
#0 chkp_find_bounds_1 (ptr=0x7ffff6a03720, ptr_src=0x7ffff6a03720,
iter=0x7fffffffd5d0) at ../../gcc/tree-chkp.c:3734
#1 0x0000000000ec7c7d in chkp_find_bounds (ptr=0x7ffff6a03720,
iter=0x7fffffffd5d0) at ../../gcc/tree-chkp.c:3768
#2 0x0000000000ec22e1 in chkp_add_bounds_to_call_stmt (gsi=0x7fffffffd5d0) at
../../gcc/tree-chkp.c:1901
#3 0x0000000000ec9a1a in chkp_instrument_function () at
../../gcc/tree-chkp.c:4344
#4 0x0000000000eca4cb in chkp_execute () at ../../gcc/tree-chkp.c:4528
...
Martin
>
> Richard.
>
>> Martin
