On 3. Oct 2024, at 17:35, Jan Hendrik Farr <ker...@jfarr.cc> wrote: > On 03 17:30:28, Thorsten Blum wrote: >> On 3. Oct 2024, at 17:22, Jan Hendrik Farr <ker...@jfarr.cc> wrote: >>> On 03 17:02:07, Thorsten Blum wrote: >>>> On 3. Oct 2024, at 15:12, Jan Hendrik Farr <ker...@jfarr.cc> wrote: >>>>> On 03 15:07:52, Thorsten Blum wrote: >>>>>> On 3. Oct 2024, at 13:33, Jan Hendrik Farr <ker...@jfarr.cc> wrote: >>>>>>>> [...] >>>>>>> >>>>>>> This issue is now fixed on the llvm main branch: >>>>>>> https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/882457a2eedbe6d53161b2f78fcf769fc9a93e8a >>>>>> >>>>>> Thanks! >>>>>> >>>>>> Do you know if it also fixes the different sizes here: >>>>>> https://godbolt.org/z/vvK9PE1Yq > > Do you already have an open issue on the llvm github? Otherwise I'll > open one and submit the PR shortly.
No, feel free to open one. Thanks! >>>>> >>>>> Unfortunately this still prints 36. >>>> >>>> I just realized that the counted_by attribute itself causes the 4 bytes >>>> difference. When you remove the attribute, the sizes are equal again. >>> >>> But we want these attributes to be in the kernel, so that >>> bounds-checking can be done in more scenarios, right? >> >> Yes >> >>> This changes clang to print 40, right? gcc prints 40 in the example >>> whether the attribute is there or not. >> >> Yes, clang prints 36 with and 40 without the attribute; gcc always 40. >> >>>>>> I ran out of disk space when compiling llvm :0 >>>>>> >>>>>>> So presumably this will go into 19.1.2, not sure what this means for >>>>>>> distros that ship clang 18. Will they have to be notified to backport >>>>>>> this? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Best Regards >>>>>>> Jan
