On Fri, Feb 27, 2026 at 5:22 PM hanwei (K) <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>
> Ping...

Can you submit a full new patch rather than just a patch on top of Kees patch?
Please use Co-authored-by: too.

Thanks,
Andrew

>
>
>
> > On Wed, Feb 25, 2026 at 12:28 AM hstk30 <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > On Mon, Feb 9, 2026 at 12:28 AM Andrew Pinski 
> > > <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > >
>
> > > > On Thu, Sep 4, 2025 at 10:43 AM Kees Cook <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > > >
>
> > > > > The __attribute__((__copy__)) functionality was crashing when
>
> > > > > copying sanitizer-related attributes because these attributes
>
> > > > > violated the standard GCC attribute infrastructure by storing
>
> > > > > INTEGER_CST values directly instead of wrapping them in TREE_LIST 
> > > > > like all other attributes.
>
> > > > >
>
> > > > > Wrap sanitizer attributes INTEGER_CST values in TREE_LIST structures
>
> > > > > to follow the same pattern as other attributes. This eliminates the
>
> > > > > copy_list() crashes when copying sanitizer attributes:
>
> > > > >
>
> > > > > test.c:4:1: internal compiler error: tree check: expected tree that 
> > > > > contains ‘common’ structure, have ‘integer_cst’ in copy_list, at 
> > > > > tree.cc:1427
>
> > > > >     4 | __attribute__((__copy__(__tanh)));
>
> > > > >       | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~
>
> > > > > 0x859d06 tree_contains_struct_check_failed(tree_node const*, 
> > > > > tree_node_structure_enum, char const*, int, char const*)
>
> > > > >         ../../gcc/gcc/tree.cc:9126
>
> > > > > 0x860f78 contains_struct_check(tree_node*, tree_node_structure_enum, 
> > > > > char const*, int, char const*)
>
> > > > >         ../../gcc/gcc/tree.h:3748
>
> > > > > 0x860f78 copy_list(tree_node*)
>
> > > > >         ../../gcc/gcc/tree.cc:1427
>
> > > > > 0xa755a5 handle_copy_attribute
>
> > > > >         ../../gcc/gcc/c-family/c-attribs.cc:3077
>
> > > >
>
> > > >
>
> > > > I am not a fan of the wrapping because it increases the memory usage
>
> > > > slightly but it is required since the rest of the attributes code
>
> > > > requires TREE_LIST here.
>
> > > >
>
> > > > So Ok.  I will do final testing either Monday or Tuesday and push it 
> > > > after that.
>
> > >
>
> > > So this causes some ICEs in the testsuite:
>
> > > FAIL: c-c++-common/asan/inline-kernel.c   -O0  (internal compiler
>
> > > error: in tree_to_sanitize_code_type, at tree.cc:6704)
>
> > >
>
> > > 0xa4376b fancy_abort(char const*, int, char const*)
>
> > >         
> > > /home/apinski/src/upstream-gcc-new/gcc/gcc/diagnostics/context.cc:1812
>
> > > 0x92f581 tree_to_sanitize_code_type(tree_node const*)
>
> > >         /home/apinski/src/upstream-gcc-new/gcc/gcc/tree.cc:6704
>
> > > 0x92f581 tree_to_sanitize_code_type(tree_node const*)
>
> > >         /home/apinski/src/upstream-gcc-new/gcc/gcc/tree.cc:6702
>
> > > 0x128bea2 print_no_sanitize_attr_value
>
> > >         /home/apinski/src/upstream-gcc-new/gcc/gcc/tree-cfg.cc:8223
>
> > > 0x128bea2 dump_function_to_file(tree_node*, _IO_FILE*, dump_flag)
>
> > >         /home/apinski/src/upstream-gcc-new/gcc/gcc/tree-cfg.cc:8276
>
> > >
>
> > >
>
> > > Looks like you forgot to update dump_function_to_file too.
>
> > > Can you double check all of the locations that use 
> > > tree_to_sanitize_code_type to make sure they all have been fixed?
>
> >
>
> > Fix this fail by below patch:
>
> >
>
> > diff --git a/gcc/tree-cfg.cc b/gcc/tree-cfg.cc
>
> > index 66ea54f8b85..808b8000603 100644
>
> > --- a/gcc/tree-cfg.cc
>
> > +++ b/gcc/tree-cfg.cc
>
> > @@ -8220,7 +8220,10 @@ dump_default_def (FILE *file, tree def, int spc, 
> > dump_flags_t flags)
>
> >  static void
>
> >  print_no_sanitize_attr_value (FILE *file, tree value)
>
> >  {
>
> > -  sanitize_code_type flags = tree_to_sanitize_code_type (value);
>
> > +  /* Extract the INTEGER_CST from the TREE_LIST wrapper.  */
>
> > +  gcc_assert (TREE_CODE (value) == TREE_LIST);
>
> > +  sanitize_code_type flags = tree_to_sanitize_code_type (TREE_VALUE 
> > (value));
>
> > +
>
> >    bool first = true;
>
> >    for (int i = 0; sanitizer_opts[i].name != NULL; ++i)
>
> >      {
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > I have checked the patch which first introduces the 
> > tree_to_sanitize_code_type
>
> > (https://inbox.sourceware.org/gcc-patches/[email protected]/)
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> > > Thanks,
>
> > > Andrew
>
> > >
>
> > > >
>
> > > > Thanks,
>
> > > > Andrew

Reply via email to