Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Fix undefined order of functions when generating code for index expressions #14374

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Jul 13, 2023
Merged

Fix undefined order of functions when generating code for index expressions #14374

Show file tree
Hide file tree
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
2 commits
Select commit Hold shift + click to select a range
16220db
IRGeneratorForStatements: Fix undefined order of functions when gener…
cameel Jun 28, 2023
5b70830
IRGeneratorForStatements: Small refactor in endVisit(IndexAccess) for…
cameel Jul 13, 2023
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
1 change: 1 addition & 0 deletions Changelog.md
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -17,6 +17,7 @@ Compiler Features:


Bugfixes:
* Code Generator: Fix not entirely deterministic order of functions in unoptimized Yul output. The choice of C++ compiler in some cases would result in different (but equivalent) bytecode (especially from native binaries vs emscripten binaries)
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Suggested change
* Code Generator: Fix not entirely deterministic order of functions in unoptimized Yul output. The choice of C++ compiler in some cases would result in different (but equivalent) bytecode (especially from native binaries vs emscripten binaries)
* Code Generator: Fix not entirely deterministic order of functions in unoptimized Yul output. The choice of C++ compiler in some cases would result in different (but equivalent) bytecode (especially from native binaries vs emscripten binaries).

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Well, we can still fix this when we sort the changelog before release. If this was a bigger mistake I'd push a new PR, but for a dot it's not worth it :)

* Commandline Interface: Fix internal error when using ``--stop-after parsing`` and requesting some of the outputs that require full analysis or compilation.
* Commandline Interface: It is no longer possible to specify both ``--optimize-yul`` and ``--no-optimize-yul`` at the same time.
* SMTChecker: Fix encoding of side-effects inside ``if`` and ``ternary conditional``statements in the BMC engine.
Expand Down
36 changes: 18 additions & 18 deletions libsolidity/codegen/ir/IRGeneratorForStatements.cpp
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -2295,13 +2295,13 @@ void IRGeneratorForStatements::endVisit(IndexAccess const& _indexAccess)
}
case DataLocation::Memory:
cameel marked this conversation as resolved.
Show resolved Hide resolved
{
string const memAddress =
m_utils.memoryArrayIndexAccessFunction(arrayType) +
"(" +
IRVariable(_indexAccess.baseExpression()).part("mpos").name() +
", " +
expressionAsType(*_indexAccess.indexExpression(), *TypeProvider::uint256()) +
")";
string const indexAccessFunction = m_utils.memoryArrayIndexAccessFunction(arrayType);
string const baseRef = IRVariable(_indexAccess.baseExpression()).part("mpos").name();
string const indexExpression = expressionAsType(
*_indexAccess.indexExpression(),
*TypeProvider::uint256()
);
string const memAddress = indexAccessFunction + "(" + baseRef + ", " + indexExpression + ")";

setLValue(_indexAccess, IRLValue{
*arrayType.baseType(),
Expand All @@ -2311,28 +2311,28 @@ void IRGeneratorForStatements::endVisit(IndexAccess const& _indexAccess)
}
case DataLocation::CallData:
{
string indexAccessFunction = m_utils.calldataArrayIndexAccessFunction(arrayType);
string const indexAccessFunctionCall =
indexAccessFunction +
"(" +
IRVariable(_indexAccess.baseExpression()).commaSeparatedList() +
", " +
expressionAsType(*_indexAccess.indexExpression(), *TypeProvider::uint256()) +
")";
string const indexAccessFunction = m_utils.calldataArrayIndexAccessFunction(arrayType);
string const baseRef = IRVariable(_indexAccess.baseExpression()).commaSeparatedList();
string const indexExpression = expressionAsType(
*_indexAccess.indexExpression(),
*TypeProvider::uint256()
);
string const calldataAddress = indexAccessFunction + "(" + baseRef + ", " + indexExpression + ")";

if (arrayType.isByteArrayOrString())
define(_indexAccess) <<
m_utils.cleanupFunction(*arrayType.baseType()) <<
"(calldataload(" <<
indexAccessFunctionCall <<
calldataAddress <<
"))\n";
else if (arrayType.baseType()->isValueType())
define(_indexAccess) <<
m_utils.readFromCalldata(*arrayType.baseType()) <<
"(" <<
indexAccessFunctionCall <<
calldataAddress <<
")\n";
else
define(_indexAccess) << indexAccessFunctionCall << "\n";
define(_indexAccess) << calldataAddress << "\n";
break;
}
}
Expand Down