Re: .ACCESS_WITH_SIZE and pointer ranges

[Qing Zhao]

> On Apr 11, 2025, at 14:12, Martin Uecker <uec...@tugraz.at> wrote:
> 
> Am Freitag, dem 11.04.2025 um 13:55 -0400 schrieb Siddhesh Poyarekar:
>> On 2025-04-11 13:37, Martin Uecker wrote:
>>>> My understanding is that such issue with the implicit data flow dependency 
>>>> information missing is only for the
>>>> counted_by attribute, not for the other TYPE which already have the bound 
>>>> information there.
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> The dependency issue is only for the size, but for
>>> other types the size information is often not
>>> preserved, so then not available later.
>>> .ACCESS_WITH_SIZE would solve this.
>> 
>> Yes, I think we had this conversation before, that .ACCESS_WITH_SIZE 
>> could for example even preserve size information across functions with 
>> __access__ attribute that were inlined.
> 
> Also in other cases the size information of an array type
> is not preserved too long in the middle end, when it is not 
> explicitely used.

In addition to the array to pointer decay cases, are there other cases for this?

Qing


> Something such as .ACCESS_WITH_SIZE is 
> needed to preserve it.
> 
> Martin
> 
>> 
>> Sid
>