search for: max_allowed_valuetyp

...); return Action; } The first part of the assertion I can understand, but why is there an assertion that there are only 32 types? in TOT LLVM if this code is called with v8f32,v2f64 or v4f64, this assert is triggered. Shouldn't the assert be: (unsigned)VT.getSimpleVT().SimpleTy < MVT::MAX_ALLOWED_VALUETYPE && or (unsigned)VT.getSimpleVT().SimpleTy < MVT::LAST_VECTOR_VALUETYPE && ? Thanks, Micah -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20120726/ffcb2cf9/attachment.html>

Hello, The attached patch is to add an assert to getValueTypeList() to verify that for simple value types their value is NOT between MAX_ALLOWED_VALUETYPE and LastSimpleValueType (inclusive) as this causes a buffer overrun. Thanks, Javier -----Original Message----- From: Duncan Sands [mailto:baldrick at free.fr] Sent: Tuesday, April 27, 2010 5:07 AM To: Martinez, Javier E Cc: LLVM Developers Mailing List Subject: Re: [LLVMdev] Bufer overrun in ge...

...> The first part of the assertion I can understand, but why is there an > assertion that there are only 32 types? in TOT LLVM if this code is > called with v8f32,v2f64 or v4f64, this assert is triggered. > Shouldn't the assert be: > (unsigned)VT.getSimpleVT().SimpleTy < MVT::MAX_ALLOWED_VALUETYPE && > or > (unsigned)VT.getSimpleVT().SimpleTy < MVT::LAST_VECTOR_VALUETYPE && > ? > > Thanks, > Micah > > -- Hal Finkel Postdoctoral Appointee Leadership Computing Facility Argonne National Laboratory -------------- next part -------------- A non-t...

...); return Action; } The first part of the assertion I can understand, but why is there an assertion that there are only 32 types? in TOT LLVM if this code is called with v8f32,v2f64 or v4f64, this assert is triggered. Shouldn't the assert be: (unsigned)VT.getSimpleVT().SimpleTy < MVT::MAX_ALLOWED_VALUETYPE && or (unsigned)VT.getSimpleVT().SimpleTy < MVT::LAST_VECTOR_VALUETYPE && ? Thanks, Micah -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20120726/42e32429/attachment.html>

...t of the assertion I can understand, but why is there an > > assertion that there are only 32 types? in TOT LLVM if this code is > > called with v8f32,v2f64 or v4f64, this assert is triggered. > > Shouldn't the assert be: > > (unsigned)VT.getSimpleVT().SimpleTy < MVT::MAX_ALLOWED_VALUETYPE && or > > (unsigned)VT.getSimpleVT().SimpleTy < MVT::LAST_VECTOR_VALUETYPE && ? > > > > Thanks, > > Micah > > > > > > > > -- > Hal Finkel > Postdoctoral Appointee > Leadership Computing Facility > Argonne National La...

Hi Duncan, I've modified my backend such that the function isn't called anymore with iPTR. I still think that if iPTR is an invalid input to getValueTypeList() that the function should have at least an assert checking that. Thanks, Javier Hi Javier, > I've observed in some tests that getValueTypeList() is sometimes called > with type MVT::iPTR. I think this is a bug,

Hi Javier, > I’ve modified my backend such that the function isn’t called anymore > with iPTR. I still think that if iPTR is an invalid input to > getValueTypeList() that the function should have at least an assert > checking that. I agree - please post a patch adding one. Ciao, Duncan.