From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3EC7FC433F5 for ; Fri, 10 Dec 2021 15:07:52 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S242644AbhLJPL0 (ORCPT ); Fri, 10 Dec 2021 10:11:26 -0500 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:36656 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S235073AbhLJPLZ (ORCPT ); Fri, 10 Dec 2021 10:11:25 -0500 Received: from mail-ed1-x52f.google.com (mail-ed1-x52f.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::52f]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 988FFC061746 for ; Fri, 10 Dec 2021 07:07:50 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-ed1-x52f.google.com with SMTP id t5so30564196edd.0 for ; Fri, 10 Dec 2021 07:07:50 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:references:user-agent:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=Wi6vFi5eIrV29ybf4YBqqBkiyBQ6fQpM8/ruJYtG6Ro=; b=Q6yarb/FZ9S7yVlGfRd1I8w2fpcgzj993nszR+UugCki2g/hsuPsaN25O1HLCdgaut 1xYXoxlcjyBvcDL8Orkka2UlaD7KswU2tb3P8iTeKhLIZ9lqq2p7h6kVrxTYWEybXi1w 79DVB7NOKRbs2EWnxSVON2ks4AJof/obUp+dcGuFyhPuTXmAje1YnF1BpX3mrikMEI+a zY0HWVB/ZaHL5ybliemK3TZ/MZlfWDKCzLckqznbt3F8NS27dWGLS1VjepI/5IytPPPP VEp4sYvsRoAQPlMX4nTVQNy8CFIc4PJFsV6AluIcODJDw/mFVpDbUAa35sP2U5rKvEql b6pw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:references:user-agent :in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=Wi6vFi5eIrV29ybf4YBqqBkiyBQ6fQpM8/ruJYtG6Ro=; b=SxsHl5bvbmFU60JSqiRYVYEYoMaq2jgVld7rwVOooaaNh2TqTCeT9ceGIYaqtwXUox lKPC93hMWiaQiE/t7Vcrw8FGliqpkyH7xHnubWkMHrRDnE5wg/42QPHaJe8L3ZCHbSYI Rlx+pAk2NAtU8CmJee/3maUMiKxrtrvCiBt/PtKJARdRHan1QxRdwk3ktAX7wMMsrIoM EBW9BXcRFTqw/ZkshhkiYrcAAqG4rdlkjVOaMJlZ3lhrC3lgcuE64CJ+ncrTyoYi1yy5 m9TJphIG68gNoqh+9oXu5urT44lSLDz3TJTNc6xpQVdB//xsaOycBJzRuGVRV2VmE3uN ruIg== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533Z0crXksYlthEXntF1CmONPzM757+VA1VRA9dQiTTmASvRjZUN YMvnWinRsYEdpNl0se4B7p0= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxoDOt2mq5mdvNbBtp38jEyZMDHhgp/P7jwp3z1vEJ7PDQ4TIUlwgQwHEmuWvQsJ/9pfYbtiA== X-Received: by 2002:a05:6402:34d2:: with SMTP id w18mr35569476edc.35.1639148833362; Fri, 10 Dec 2021 07:07:13 -0800 (PST) Received: from gmgdl (j120189.upc-j.chello.nl. [24.132.120.189]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id ga26sm1597731ejc.11.2021.12.10.07.07.12 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Fri, 10 Dec 2021 07:07:12 -0800 (PST) Received: from avar by gmgdl with local (Exim 4.95) (envelope-from ) id 1mvhUN-000MMD-EO; Fri, 10 Dec 2021 16:07:11 +0100 From: =?utf-8?B?w4Z2YXIgQXJuZmrDtnLDsA==?= Bjarmason To: Johannes Schindelin Cc: Jeff King , git@vger.kernel.org, Junio C Hamano , Erik Faye-Lund , Jonathan Nieder Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 02/10] range-diff.c: don't use st_mult() for signed "int" Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2021 15:58:43 +0100 References: <211210.86lf0sdah1.gmgdl@evledraar.gmail.com> User-agent: Debian GNU/Linux bookworm/sid; Emacs 27.1; mu4e 1.6.10 In-reply-to: Message-ID: <211210.868rwscxcw.gmgdl@evledraar.gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Dec 10 2021, Johannes Schindelin wrote: > Hi Peff, > > On Fri, 10 Dec 2021, Jeff King wrote: > >> On Fri, Dec 10, 2021 at 11:22:59AM +0100, =C3=86var Arnfj=C3=B6r=C3=B0 B= jarmason wrote: >> >> > > Dropping the st_mult() does nothing to fix the actual problem (which= is >> > > that this function should use a more appropriate type), but introduc= es >> > > new failure modes. >> > >> > Yes you're entirely right. I had some stupid blinders on while writing >> > this. FWIW I think I was experimenting with some local macros and >> > conflated a testing of the overflow of n*n in gdb with the caste'd >> > version, which you rightly point out here won't have the overflow issue >> > at all. Sorry. >> >> I'm not sure if this is helpful or not, but this is the minimal fix I >> came up with that runs the testcase I showed earlier. It's basically >> just swapping out "int" for "ssize_t" for any variables we use to index >> the arrays (though note a few are themselves held in arrays, and we have >> to cross some function boundaries). >> >> I won't be surprised if it doesn't hit all cases, or if it even hits a >> few it doesn't need to (e.g., should "phase" be dragged along with "i" >> and "j" in the first hunk?). I mostly did guess-and-check on the >> test-case, fixing whatever segfaulted and then running again until it >> worked. I didn't even really read the code very carefully. >> >> I think you _did_ do more of that careful reading, and broke down the >> refactorings into separate patches in your series. Which is good. So I >> think what we'd want is to pick out those parts of your series that end >> up switching the variable type. My goal in sharing this here is just to >> show that the end result of the fix can (and IMHO should) be around this >> same order of magnitude. > > I am in favor of this patch. Will you have time to submit this with a > commit message? I'd also be happy to pick it up as a massaging of my s/int/intmax_t/ change. I think per[1] that intmax_t is more portable here than ssize_t, but I'm very likely to be missing something. Corrections most welcome. Per [1] I ejected that out of my v2 because I think the "cost" being larger than 1<<16 might not be all that useful. I.e. the limiting that's in get_correspondences(). But I'll happily admit ignorance on how the actual guts of range-diff work, I just wanted to fix a segfault I kept running into locally at some point, and figured I'd submit this RFC. Doesn't an enlargement of the "int" from an assumed 32 bit unsigned to say a 64bit unsigned require that 16bit unsigned COST_MAX to be correspondingly bumped to 32bit unsigned? I.e. we'd define it as 1/2 of whatever "intmax_t" (or "ssize_t" or "long long int" or whatever) is defined as? That may be a question under the umbrella of "=C3=86var doesn't actually understand range-diff", but think I recall playing with bumping one and not the other (or bumping COST_MAX too close to the size of the container type) and running into errors... 1. https://lore.kernel.org/git/211210.86czm4d3zo.gmgdl@evledraar.gmail.com/