Re: Failures with gcd functions with GCC snapshots GCC and -O3 (?)

From: Dean Rasheed <dean(dot)a(dot)rasheed(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>
Cc: Postgres hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>, Fabien COELHO <coelho(at)cri(dot)ensmp(dot)fr>
Subject: Re: Failures with gcd functions with GCC snapshots GCC and -O3 (?)
Date: 2021-06-03 08:28:08
Message-ID: CAEZATCUXVvq_TMyQOeaJKkJt=8oUmACqDHq13p7qL-_ncKH09A@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Thu, 3 Jun 2021 at 08:26, Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> serinus has been complaining about the new gcd functions in 13~:
> https://buildfarm.postgresql.org/cgi-bin/show_log.pl?nm=serinus&dt=2021-06-03%2003%3A44%3A14
>
> The overflow detection is going wrong the way up and down, like here:
> SELECT gcd((-9223372036854775808)::int8, (-9223372036854775808)::int8); -- overflow
> -ERROR: bigint out of range
> + gcd
> +----------------------
> + -9223372036854775808
> +(1 row)
>
> That seems like a compiler bug to me as this host uses recent GCC
> snapshots, and I cannot see a problem in GCC 10.2 on my own dev box.
> But perhaps I am missing something?
>

Huh, yeah. The code is pretty clear that that should throw an error:

if (arg1 == PG_INT64_MIN)
{
if (arg2 == 0 || arg2 == PG_INT64_MIN)
ereport(ERROR,
(errcode(ERRCODE_NUMERIC_VALUE_OUT_OF_RANGE),
errmsg("bigint out of range")));

and FWIW it works OK on my dev box with gcc 10.2.1 and the same cflags.

Regards,
Dean

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Sergei Kornilov 2021-06-03 09:34:26 Re: Failures with gcd functions with GCC snapshots GCC and -O3 (?)
Previous Message Michael Paquier 2021-06-03 07:26:49 Failures with gcd functions with GCC snapshots GCC and -O3 (?)