<div dir="auto"><div><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Tue, 8 Oct 2019, 10:42 Christof Douma via cfe-dev, <<a href="mailto:cfe-dev@lists.llvm.org">cfe-dev@lists.llvm.org</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div lang="EN-GB" link="blue" vlink="purple">
<div class="m_5344053274475391200WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span>Hi Richard, Paul and other.<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span>Thanks for the input so far. I wanted to point out that it’s not our code-base. Rather, we’re seeing more use of the LLVM technology in the automotive market and as usual we’re faced with existing
code bases that are tried and tested with other toolchains (gcc or others) and when LLVM comes along things don’t always work directly.<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span>We’ve suggested better ways of structuring their code and your suggestions are certainly good input. However, legacy code is especially sticky in any market that has to handle ‘safety’ concerns,
like automotive, aerospace and medical markets. Code changes are pretty expensive in those fields. So while I hope that over time we see more sensible coding structures, I don’t expect that to happen any time soon. In the mean time, we’re searching for a solution
for this coding pattern that doesn’t play well with clang.<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span>Hope that gave some more background of where this question comes from.<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Do all options that were suggested by Mikhail really require fundamental restructuring of major parts of clang? This surprised me, I had expected that the option 2 to be possible without a complete overhaul. (2 is
<span>“</span>Track until an overflow occurs after that make the lexer output the <invalid location> special value for all subsequent tokens.”)</p></div></div></blockquote></div></div><div dir="auto">Clang uses source locations as part of the semantic representation of the AST in some cases (simple example: some forms of initialization might use parens or not, with different semantics, and we distinguish between them based on whether we have paren locations; there are also some checks that look at which of two source locations came first when determining which warnings or errors to produce, and so on). Maybe we could go through and fix all of those, but that's still a very large task and it'd be hard to check we got them all.</div><div dir="auto"><div class="gmail_quote"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div lang="EN-GB" link="blue" vlink="purple"><div class="m_5344053274475391200WordSection1"><p class="MsoNormal">Not nice user experience but maybe doable? I was hoping there was something slightly
better that still works without a major restructuring (maybe something that at least gives a rough location or something that only gives the location of the error and not the include stack under an option or using some kind of heuristic to detect that things
go haywire).<u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">As an alternative, I was curious if it would be possible and acceptable to make the switch between 32-bit and 64-bit location tracking a build-time/cmake decision? I’ve not done any estimation on the memory size growth, so maybe this is
a dead end.</p></div></div></blockquote></div></div><div dir="auto">If someone is prepared to do the work to add and maintain this build mode, I think this might be a feasible option.</div><div dir="auto"><div class="gmail_quote"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div lang="EN-GB" link="blue" vlink="purple"><div class="m_5344053274475391200WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span>Thanks,<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span>Christof<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<div style="border:none;border-left:solid blue 1.5pt;padding:0cm 0cm 0cm 4.0pt">
<div>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #e1e1e1 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0cm 0cm 0cm">
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span lang="EN-US">From:</span></b><span lang="EN-US"> cfe-dev <<a href="mailto:cfe-dev-bounces@lists.llvm.org" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">cfe-dev-bounces@lists.llvm.org</a>>
<b>On Behalf Of </b>Richard Smith via cfe-dev<br>
<b>Sent:</b> 07 October 2019 20:36<br>
<b>To:</b> Mikhail Maltsev <<a href="mailto:Mikhail.Maltsev@arm.com" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">Mikhail.Maltsev@arm.com</a>><br>
<b>Cc:</b> nd <<a href="mailto:nd@arm.com" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">nd@arm.com</a>>; <a href="mailto:cfe-dev@lists.llvm.org" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">cfe-dev@lists.llvm.org</a><br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [cfe-dev] [RFC] Clang SourceLocation overflow<u></u><u></u></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">On Wed, 2 Oct 2019 at 09:26, Mikhail Maltsev via cfe-dev <<a href="mailto:cfe-dev@lists.llvm.org" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">cfe-dev@lists.llvm.org</a>> wrote:<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<blockquote style="border:none;border-left:solid #cccccc 1.0pt;padding:0cm 0cm 0cm 6.0pt;margin-left:4.8pt;margin-top:5.0pt;margin-right:0cm;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<p class="MsoNormal">Hi all,<br>
<br>
We are experiencing a problem with Clang SourceLocation overflow.<br>
Currently source locations are 32-bit values, one bit is a flag, which gives<br>
a source location space of 2^31 characters.<br>
<br>
When the Clang lexer processes an #include directive it reserves the total size<br>
of the file being included in the source location space. An overflow can occur<br>
if a large file (which does not have include guards by design) is included many<br>
times into a single TU.<br>
<br>
The pattern of including a file multiple times is for example required by<br>
the AUTOSAR standard [1], which is widely used in the automotive industry.<br>
Specifically the pattern is described in the Specification of Memory Mapping [2]:<br>
<br>
Section 8.2.1, MEMMAP003:<br>
"The start and stop symbols for section control are configured with section<br>
identifiers defined in MemMap.h [...] For instance:<br>
<br>
#define EEP_START_SEC_VAR_16BIT<br>
#include "MemMap.h"<br>
static uint16 EepTimer;<br>
static uint16 EepRemainingBytes;<br>
#define EEP_STOP_SEC_VAR_16BIT<br>
#include "MemMap.h""<br>
<br>
Section 8.2.2, MEMMAP005:<br>
"The file MemMap.h shall provide a mechanism to select different code, variable<br>
or constant sections by checking the definition of the module specific memory<br>
allocation key words for starting a section [...]"<br>
<br>
In practice MemMap.h can reach several MBs and can be included several thousand<br>
times causing an overflow in the source location space.<br>
<br>
The problem does not occur with GCC because it tracks line numbers rather than<br>
file offsets. Column numbers are tracked separately and are optional. I.e., in<br>
GCC a source location can be either a (line+column) tuple packed into 32 bits or<br>
(when the line number exceeds a certain threshold) a 32-bit line number.<br>
<br>
We are looking for an acceptable way of resolving the problem and propose the<br>
following approaches for discussion:<br>
1. Use 64 bits for source location tracking.<br>
2. Track until an overflow occurs after that make the lexer output<br>
the <invalid location> special value for all subsequent tokens.<br>
3. Implement an approach similar to the one used by GCC and start tracking line<br>
numbers instead of file offsets after a certain threshold. Resort to (2)<br>
when even line numbers overflow.<br>
4. (?) Detect the multiple inclusion pattern and track it differently (for now<br>
we don't have specific ideas on how to implement this)<br>
<br>
Is any of these approaches viable? What caveats should we expect? (we already<br>
know about static_asserts guarding the sizes of certain class fields which start<br>
failing in the first approach).<br>
<br>
Other suggestions are welcome.<u></u><u></u></p>
</blockquote>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">I don't think any of the above approaches are reasonable; they would all require fundamental restructuring of major parts of Clang, an efficiency or memory size hit for all other users of Clang, or some combination of those.<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Your code pattern seems unreasonable; including a multi-megabyte file thousands of times is not a good idea. Can you split out parts of MemMap.h into a separate header that is only included once, and keep only the parts that actually change
on repeated inclusion in MemMap.h itself?<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
_______________________________________________<br>
cfe-dev mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:cfe-dev@lists.llvm.org" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">cfe-dev@lists.llvm.org</a><br>
<a href="https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-dev" rel="noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank">https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-dev</a><br>
</blockquote></div></div></div>