| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> | 
|---|---|
| To: | Kris Jurka <books(at)ejurka(dot)com> | 
| Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org | 
| Subject: | Re: Need -fwrapv or -fno-strict-overflow for gcc-4.3 | 
| Date: | 2008-03-10 15:39:46 | 
| Message-ID: | 24549.1205163586@sss.pgh.pa.us | 
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email | 
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers | 
Kris Jurka <books(at)ejurka(dot)com> writes:
> Gcc 4.3 has started to perform optimizations based on the denial of the 
> existence of signed overflow.
> ...
> I don't understand the difference between -fwrapv and 
> -fno-strict-aliasing, but it seems we need at least one of them.
I don't see -fno-strict-overflow listed at all in the manual for gcc 4.1.
So I think we should go for -fwrapv, which is defined thus:
`-fwrapv'
     This option instructs the compiler to assume that signed arithmetic
     overflow of addition, subtraction and multiplication wraps around
     using twos-complement representation.  This flag enables some
     optimizations and disables others.  This option is enabled by
     default for the Java front-end, as required by the Java language
     specification.
and so doesn't sound nearly as bad as Jakub painted it ;-).  If we use
the other, we are assuming that there are no problems in 4.1, which
feels to me like a dangerous assumption.  4.1 *did* break mysql,
remember; and we have no regression tests checking most of these
security-related overflow tests, so we have no direct proof that we
are not broken.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Teodor Sigaev | 2008-03-10 16:01:46 | Re: Include Lists for Text Search | 
| Previous Message | Teodor Sigaev | 2008-03-10 15:21:03 | Re: [PATCHES] Include Lists for Text Search |