linux-sparse.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Luc Van Oostenryck <luc.vanoostenryck@gmail.com>
To: linux-sparse@vger.kernel.org
Cc: Ramsay Jones <ramsay@ramsayjones.plus.com>,
	Luc Van Oostenryck <luc.vanoostenryck@gmail.com>
Subject: [PATCH v3 06/16] add testcases for packed bitfields
Date: Thu, 31 Dec 2020 11:10:24 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20201231101034.59978-7-luc.vanoostenryck@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20201231101034.59978-1-luc.vanoostenryck@gmail.com>

Currently, packed bitfields are not handled correctly.

Add some testcases for them.

Signed-off-by: Luc Van Oostenryck <luc.vanoostenryck@gmail.com>
---
 validation/packed-bitfield0.c | 59 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
 validation/packed-bitfield1.c | 28 +++++++++++++++++
 validation/packed-bitfield2.c | 16 ++++++++++
 validation/packed-bitfield3.c | 29 +++++++++++++++++
 validation/packed-bitfield4.c | 19 +++++++++++
 validation/packed-bitfield5.c | 21 +++++++++++++
 6 files changed, 172 insertions(+)
 create mode 100644 validation/packed-bitfield0.c
 create mode 100644 validation/packed-bitfield1.c
 create mode 100644 validation/packed-bitfield2.c
 create mode 100644 validation/packed-bitfield3.c
 create mode 100644 validation/packed-bitfield4.c
 create mode 100644 validation/packed-bitfield5.c

diff --git a/validation/packed-bitfield0.c b/validation/packed-bitfield0.c
new file mode 100644
index 000000000000..f84e7b904a82
--- /dev/null
+++ b/validation/packed-bitfield0.c
@@ -0,0 +1,59 @@
+#define alignof(X)	__alignof__(X)
+#define __packed	__attribute__((packed))
+
+struct sa {
+	int a:7;
+	int c:10;
+	int b:2;
+} __packed;
+_Static_assert(alignof(struct sa) == 1, "alignof(struct sa)");
+_Static_assert( sizeof(struct sa) == 3,  "sizeof(struct sa)");
+
+
+static int get_size(void)
+{
+	return sizeof(struct sa);
+}
+
+static void chk_align(struct sa sa, struct sa *p)
+{
+	_Static_assert(alignof(sa) == 1, "alignof(sa)");
+	_Static_assert(alignof(*p) == 1, "alignof(*p)");
+}
+
+static int fp0(struct sa *sa)
+{
+	return sa->c;
+}
+
+static int fpx(struct sa *sa, int idx)
+{
+	return sa[idx].c;
+}
+
+static int fglobal(void)
+{
+	extern struct sa g;
+	return g.c;
+}
+
+static struct sa l;
+static int flocal(void)
+{
+	return l.c;
+}
+
+
+int main(void)
+{
+	extern void fun(struct sa *);
+	struct sa sa = { 0 };
+
+	fun(&sa);
+	return 0;
+}
+
+/*
+ * check-name: packed-bitfield0
+ * check-known-to-fail
+ */
diff --git a/validation/packed-bitfield1.c b/validation/packed-bitfield1.c
new file mode 100644
index 000000000000..208a3dc5127c
--- /dev/null
+++ b/validation/packed-bitfield1.c
@@ -0,0 +1,28 @@
+#define __packed	__attribute__((packed))
+
+struct s {
+	unsigned int f0:1;
+	unsigned int f1:1;
+	unsigned int pad:6;
+} __packed;
+_Static_assert(sizeof(struct s) == 1,  "sizeof(struct s)");
+
+extern struct s g;
+
+static int foo(struct s *ptr)
+{
+	int f = 0;
+
+	f += g.f0;
+	f += g.f1;
+
+	f += ptr->f0;
+	f += ptr->f1;
+
+	return f;
+}
+
+/*
+ * check-name: packed-bitfield1
+ * check-known-to-fail
+ */
diff --git a/validation/packed-bitfield2.c b/validation/packed-bitfield2.c
new file mode 100644
index 000000000000..4587ebec5c90
--- /dev/null
+++ b/validation/packed-bitfield2.c
@@ -0,0 +1,16 @@
+struct bf2 {
+	unsigned p1:2;
+	unsigned i1:32;
+	unsigned p2:2;
+	unsigned s9:9;
+	unsigned s9:9;
+	unsigned s9:9;
+	unsigned b1:1;
+} __attribute__((packed));
+
+_Static_assert(sizeof(struct bf2) == 8);
+
+/*
+ * check-name: packed-bitfield2
+ * check-known-to-fail
+ */
diff --git a/validation/packed-bitfield3.c b/validation/packed-bitfield3.c
new file mode 100644
index 000000000000..c06e7c41cbcd
--- /dev/null
+++ b/validation/packed-bitfield3.c
@@ -0,0 +1,29 @@
+#define __packed __attribute__((packed))
+
+typedef unsigned char   u8;
+typedef __UINT16_TYPE__ u16;
+typedef __UINT32_TYPE__ u32;
+typedef __UINT64_TYPE__ u64;
+
+struct b {
+	u32	a:1;
+	u32	b:2;
+	u32	c:4;
+	u32	d:8;
+	u32	e:16;
+} __packed;
+_Static_assert(__alignof(struct b) == 1);
+_Static_assert(   sizeof(struct b) == 4);
+
+struct c {
+	u8	a;
+	u8	b;
+	u64	c:48;
+} __packed;
+_Static_assert(__alignof(struct c) == 1);
+_Static_assert(   sizeof(struct c) == 8);
+
+/*
+ * check-name: packed-bitfield3
+ * check-known-to-fail
+ */
diff --git a/validation/packed-bitfield4.c b/validation/packed-bitfield4.c
new file mode 100644
index 000000000000..0342b2414b6e
--- /dev/null
+++ b/validation/packed-bitfield4.c
@@ -0,0 +1,19 @@
+#define __packed __attribute__((packed))
+
+typedef __UINT32_TYPE__ u32;
+
+struct s {
+	u32	f:24;
+} __packed;
+_Static_assert(sizeof(struct s) == 3);
+
+static int ld(struct s *s)
+{
+	return s->f;
+}
+
+/*
+ * check-name: packed-bitfield4
+ * check-description: Is check_access() OK with short packed bitfields?
+ * check-known-to-fail
+ */
diff --git a/validation/packed-bitfield5.c b/validation/packed-bitfield5.c
new file mode 100644
index 000000000000..8f44d4c2c277
--- /dev/null
+++ b/validation/packed-bitfield5.c
@@ -0,0 +1,21 @@
+#define __packed __attribute__((packed))
+
+typedef __UINT32_TYPE__ u32;
+
+struct s {
+	u32	a:5;
+	u32	f:30;
+	u32	z:5;
+} __packed;
+_Static_assert(sizeof(struct s) == 5);
+
+static int ld(struct s *s)
+{
+	return s->f;
+}
+
+/*
+ * check-name: packed-bitfield5
+ * check-description: is check_access() OK with 'overlapping' packed bitfields?
+ * check-known-to-fail
+ */
-- 
2.29.2


  parent reply	other threads:[~2020-12-31 10:12 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2020-12-31 10:10 [PATCH v3 00/16] support __packed struct Luc Van Oostenryck
2020-12-31 10:10 ` [PATCH v3 01/16] add testcases for dubious enum values Luc Van Oostenryck
2020-12-31 10:10 ` [PATCH v3 02/16] add testcases for exotic " Luc Van Oostenryck
2020-12-31 10:10 ` [PATCH v3 03/16] add testcases for enum attributes Luc Van Oostenryck
2020-12-31 10:10 ` [PATCH v3 04/16] add testcases for type attributes Luc Van Oostenryck
2020-12-31 10:10 ` [PATCH v3 05/16] add testcases for packed structures Luc Van Oostenryck
2020-12-31 10:10 ` Luc Van Oostenryck [this message]
2020-12-31 10:10 ` [PATCH v3 07/16] apply_ctype: use self-explanatory argument name Luc Van Oostenryck
2020-12-31 10:10 ` [PATCH v3 08/16] apply_ctype: reverse the order of arguments Luc Van Oostenryck
2020-12-31 10:10 ` [PATCH v3 09/16] apply_ctype: move up its declaration Luc Van Oostenryck
2020-12-31 10:10 ` [PATCH v3 10/16] struct-attr: prepare to handle attributes at the end of struct definitions (1) Luc Van Oostenryck
2020-12-31 10:10 ` [PATCH v3 11/16] struct-attr: prepare to handle attributes at the end of struct definitions (2) Luc Van Oostenryck
2020-12-31 10:10 ` [PATCH v3 12/16] struct-attr: prepare to handle attributes at the end of struct definitions (3) Luc Van Oostenryck
2020-12-31 10:10 ` [PATCH v3 13/16] struct-attr: fix type attribute like 'struct __attr { ... }' Luc Van Oostenryck
2020-12-31 10:10 ` [PATCH v3 14/16] struct-attr: fix: do not ignore struct/union/enum type attributes Luc Van Oostenryck
2020-12-31 10:10 ` [PATCH v3 15/16] packed: no out-of-bound access of packed bitfields Luc Van Oostenryck
2020-12-31 10:10 ` [PATCH v3 16/16] packed: add support for __packed struct Luc Van Oostenryck
2020-12-31 15:30 ` [PATCH v3 00/16] support " Ramsay Jones

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20201231101034.59978-7-luc.vanoostenryck@gmail.com \
    --to=luc.vanoostenryck@gmail.com \
    --cc=linux-sparse@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=ramsay@ramsayjones.plus.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).