On 11/9/21 5:52 PM, Peter Maydell wrote:
On Fri, 29 Oct 2021 at 05:59, Richard Henderson <richard.hender...@linaro.org> wrote:Reviewed-by: Luis Pires <luis.pi...@eldorado.org.br> Reviewed-by: Philippe Mathieu-Daudé <f4...@amsat.org> Signed-off-by: Richard Henderson <richard.hender...@linaro.org> --- tcg/optimize.c | 39 ++++++++++++++++++++++----------------- 1 file changed, 22 insertions(+), 17 deletions(-) diff --git a/tcg/optimize.c b/tcg/optimize.c index 110b3d1cc2..faedbdbfb8 100644 --- a/tcg/optimize.c +++ b/tcg/optimize.c @@ -888,6 +888,25 @@ static bool fold_eqv(OptContext *ctx, TCGOp *op) return fold_const2(ctx, op); }Hi; Coverity warns about a shift in here (CID 1465220):+static bool fold_extract2(OptContext *ctx, TCGOp *op) +{ + if (arg_is_const(op->args[1]) && arg_is_const(op->args[2])) { + uint64_t v1 = arg_info(op->args[1])->val; + uint64_t v2 = arg_info(op->args[2])->val; + int shr = op->args[3]; + + if (op->opc == INDEX_op_extract2_i64) { + v1 >>= shr; + v2 <<= 64 - shr; + } else { + v1 = (uint32_t)v1 >> shr; + v2 = (int32_t)v2 << (32 - shr);Here we do the shift at 32-bits and then assign it into a 64-bit variable, which triggers Coverity's usual OVERFLOW_BEFORE_WIDEN heuristic. Is the 32-bitness intentional?
Yep. I'll add another cast. r~
