Hi!
This routine, besides aspiring to win obfuscated C contest (not trying to
address that) contains two undefined signed overflows, which presumably
show up in arm testing. One overflow is on z = x - y; line,
where the x looks just like obfuscation (it is always 0), for input equal to
INT_MIN bits (from what I understand, the routine wants to return normal
negation of all values but INT_MIN, which is instead replaced with INT_MAX).
Fixed by doing the subtraction (== negation) in UINT_C_TYPE instead.
Another issue is that ((INT_C_TYPE) 1) << I_F_BITS, if it is equal to
INT_MIN, overflows on z-- (x >= 0 is always true, another obfuscation).
Untested, Greta, can you please test this on arm? Ok for trunk?
2012-12-11 Jakub Jelinek <ja...@redhat.com>
PR libgcc/55451
* fixed-bit.c (FIXED_SSNEG): Avoid undefined signed overflows.
--- gcc/fixed-bit.c.jj 2011-11-04 07:49:37.000000000 +0100
+++ gcc/fixed-bit.c 2012-12-11 13:16:53.701767571 +0100
@@ -1,5 +1,5 @@
/* This is a software fixed-point library.
- Copyright (C) 2007, 2009, 2011 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
+ Copyright (C) 2007, 2009, 2011, 2012 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
This file is part of GCC.
@@ -569,16 +569,11 @@ FIXED_SSNEG (FIXED_C_TYPE a)
INT_C_TYPE x, y, z;
memcpy (&y, &a, FIXED_SIZE);
x = 0;
- z = x - y;
+ z = x - (UINT_C_TYPE) y;
if (((x ^ y) >> I_F_BITS) & 1)
{
if (((z ^ x) >> I_F_BITS) & 1)
- {
- z = 1;
- z = z << I_F_BITS;
- if (x >= 0)
- z--;
- }
+ z = (((UINT_C_TYPE) 1) << I_F_BITS) - 1;
}
#if HAVE_PADDING_BITS
z = z << PADDING_BITS;
Jakub
