<html>
<head>
<base href="https://bugs.llvm.org/">
</head>
<body><table border="1" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="8">
<tr>
<th>Bug ID</th>
<td><a class="bz_bug_link
bz_status_NEW "
title="NEW - Invalid optimization: two different array indices are considered equal"
href="https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=46055">46055</a>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<th>Summary</th>
<td>Invalid optimization: two different array indices are considered equal
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<th>Product</th>
<td>clang
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<th>Version</th>
<td>10.0
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<th>Hardware</th>
<td>PC
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<th>OS</th>
<td>Linux
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<th>Status</th>
<td>NEW
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<th>Severity</th>
<td>normal
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<th>Priority</th>
<td>P
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<th>Component</th>
<td>C
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<th>Assignee</th>
<td>unassignedclangbugs@nondot.org
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<th>Reporter</th>
<td>bruno@clisp.org
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<th>CC</th>
<td>blitzrakete@gmail.com, dgregor@apple.com, erik.pilkington@gmail.com, llvm-bugs@lists.llvm.org, richard-llvm@metafoo.co.uk
</td>
</tr></table>
<p>
<div>
<pre>Created <span class=""><a href="attachment.cgi?id=23527" name="attach_23527" title="Test case">attachment 23527</a> <a href="attachment.cgi?id=23527&action=edit" title="Test case">[details]</a></span>
Test case
The attached program, foo.c, ought to exit with code 3 if calloc() fails, and
with code 2 if calloc() succeeds.
Without optimization, it's as expected:
$ clang -Wall foo.c
$ ./a.out; echo $?
3
With optimization, it's wrong:
$ clang -Wall -O2 foo.c
$ ./a.out; echo $?
0
Here's the output of the clang optimizer:
$ clang -Wall -O2 -S foo.c && cat foo.s
.text
.file "foo.c"
.globl main # -- Begin function main
.p2align 4, 0x90
.type main,@function
main: # @main
.cfi_startproc
# %bb.0:
xorl %eax, %eax
retq
.Lfunc_end0:
.size main, .Lfunc_end0-main
.cfi_endproc
# -- End function
.ident "clang version 10.0.0 "
.section ".note.GNU-stack","",@progbits
.addrsig
As you can see, clang must have evaluated the condition (s[n - 1].c[0]) to
true. But since the memory of s was freshly allocated and zero-filled and the
index n-1 is different from 0, this condition ought to have evaluated to false.
Probably the bug is related to the fact that (n-1) * sizeof (S8) is a multiple
of 2^64.
If clang is assuming a flat address space (of size 2^64), it may indeed
simplify (n-1) * sizeof (S8) to zero, but then it must not assume that calloc()
will return a non-NULL pointer.
If clang is NOT assuming a flat address space, it must not simplify (n-1) *
sizeof (S8) to zero.</pre>
</div>
</p>
<hr>
<span>You are receiving this mail because:</span>
<ul>
<li>You are on the CC list for the bug.</li>
</ul>
</body>
</html>