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.

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 implicit 64 to 32 bit conversion warnings #3955

Draft
wants to merge 4 commits into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

antond-weta
Copy link
Contributor

Description

Enabling the implicit 64 to 32 bit conversion warnings shows several hundreds of them. This is my attempt to fix them all.

Tests

I have built the code on an Apple silicon Mac (both command line and Xcode), and an x64 linux machine, and have run the tests. I have not tested on Windows, or any 32-bit hardware.

I'm not familiar with the project enough to say that my testing was adequate. Any help would be appreciated.

Checklist:

  • I have read the contribution guidelines.
  • I have updated the documentation, if applicable.
  • I have ensured that the change is tested somewhere in the testsuite
    (adding new test cases if necessary).
  • If I added or modified a C++ API call, I have also amended the
    corresponding Python bindings (and if altering ImageBufAlgo functions, also
    exposed the new functionality as oiiotool options).
  • My code follows the prevailing code style of this project. If I haven't
    already run clang-format before submitting, I definitely will look at the CI
    test that runs clang-format and fix anything that it highlights as being
    nonconforming.

Signed-off-by: Anton Dukhovnikov <antond@wetafx.co.nz>
@@ -86,15 +86,15 @@ inline char SwapBytes( char& value )


template <typename T>
void SwapBuffer(T *buf, unsigned int len)
void SwapBuffer(T *buf, size_t len)
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I don't understand what's going on here. The parameter was unsigned int, and the loop variable below is also unsigned int. Why change to size_t? And if the param is size_t, doesn't it just make a new potential problem or warning in the loop below that still is unsigned int?

Copy link
Contributor Author

@antond-weta antond-weta Aug 23, 2023

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

SwapBuffer gets called from EndianSwapImageBuffer, passing the length parameter. EndianSwapImageBuffer in turn is called from multiple places with size_t as the length parameter. Changing the param type seemed more logical to me. I have indeed overlooked the int in the loop.

Signed-off-by: Anton Dukhovnikov <antond@wetafx.co.nz>
Signed-off-by: Anton Dukhovnikov <antond@wetafx.co.nz>
Signed-off-by: Anton Dukhovnikov <antond@wetafx.co.nz>
Copy link
Contributor

@jessey-git jessey-git left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Meta comment / battle for another day: What style of casts are preferred? Functional int(x) or c-style (int)x -- both are used in this PR, sometimes even within the same file.

I tried to look over things carefully but will want to take another fresh look tomorrow just in case.

@@ -48,7 +48,7 @@ class HdrInput final : public ImageInput {
bool read_native_scanline(int subimage, int miplevel, int y, int z,
void* data) override;
bool close() override;
int current_subimage(void) const override { return m_subimage; }
int current_subimage(void) const override { return (int)m_subimage; }
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Unintentional change? m_subimage is already an int?

@@ -91,7 +91,7 @@ class DeepData::Impl { // holds all the nontrivial stuff
spin_lock lock(m_mutex);
if (!m_allocated) {
// m_cumcapacity.resize (npixels);
size_t totalcapacity = 0;
int totalcapacity = 0;
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Seems odd to use int here for a total when the items added are each uint32_t themselves.

imagesize_t tile_pixels = m_spec.tile_pixels();
imagesize_t nvals = tile_pixels * m_inputchannels;
int tile_pixels = (int)m_spec.tile_pixels();
int nvals = tile_pixels * m_inputchannels;
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I believe large tiles would be broken with this. tile_pixels * m_inputchannels can overflow 2billion here e.g. a 24k, 4-channel image, with 1 tile

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

These 2 values get passed to palette_to_rgb and bit_convert which take ints. If int overflows for large tiles, the issue is already there. We may want to modify those two to take a larger type.

This is actually a good example why this work is worth doing.

Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Although each dimension of an image (width, height, depth, nchannels, subimages, etc) are usually declared as int for simplicity (and the fact that at this point, we don't imagine any of those being > 2^31), we use imagesize_t (a.k.a. uint64_t) when we have to talk about the number of pixels or values in a tile or images (because those other dimensions may multiply).

So I think in this case, you want to keep tile_pixels and nvals as imagesize_t. It's the count parameters in palette_to_rgb and bit_convert that should probably should be upgraded to imagesize_t rather than int.

@@ -28,7 +28,7 @@ namespace fits_pvt {
// struct in which we store information about one subimage. This information
// allow us to set up pointer at the beginning of given subimage
struct Subimage {
int number;
size_t number;
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Why the change here? Subimages in OIIO are ints and other formats store their equivalent as an int. Actually is this even used? I see one line that sets this value but nothing ever reads from it; maybe remove it entirely.

@@ -21,7 +21,7 @@ static std::string
test_numeric(T* data, int num_elements, TypeDesc type)
{
ParamValue p("name", type, num_elements, data);
int n = type.numelements() * num_elements;
int n = (int)type.numelements() * num_elements;
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

This is opposite of what was done inside src/libutil/paramlist.cpp where size_t was kept.

@@ -1243,7 +1243,7 @@ TIFFOutput::write_scanline(int y, int z, TypeDesc format, const void* data,
std::vector<unsigned char> cmyk;
if (m_photometric == PHOTOMETRIC_SEPARATED && m_convert_rgb_to_cmyk)
data = convert_to_cmyk(spec().width, data, cmyk);
size_t scanline_vals = size_t(spec().width) * m_outputchans;
int scanline_vals = spec().width * m_outputchans;
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

While this won't overflow because TIFF has a width restriction of 1048576, a calculation a few lines below this keeps the size_t for a similar multiplication against the format size.

Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Yeah, this is another one that definitely should stay size_t (or even more explicitly be imagesize_t, though those are the same thing on 64 bit platforms).

@lgritz
Copy link
Collaborator

lgritz commented Aug 23, 2023

I'm worried that this is a rathole that's just going to waste a lot of Anton's time and will touch lots of things that have been working for a long time, possibly introducing subtle bugs if we aren't very careful.

Before continuing to fix these individually, let's step back and think about a few things:

  1. Why is this happening now? I feel like we've fixed this kind of warning before, any time the compilers detect them. Is xcode different? Is it doing the equivalent of -Wall by default? Is Apple silicon different because the definitions of long or long long have changed versus x86_64 or something of that nature?

  2. Are the same warnings revealed on other platforms if we use -Wall? (This can be enabled from from the OIIO cmake build with -DEXTRA_WARNINGS=ON.)

  3. Anton, before trying to actually fix any more of these, can you go back to the original code, build it (maybe with -DSTOP_ON_WARNING=OFF so it doesn't stop at the first one) and just paste the full warning report here or in an issue? Then let's just spend a little time looking it over and discussing what should really be fixed and how, what is a "false positive", and what should have pragmas to ignore the errors (and how local can we make those pragmas -- per file or even per line might be more targeted than turning the warnings off for the whole codebase).

@antond-weta
Copy link
Contributor Author

Larry, doing Wall does not find anything new for me, the log is clean. The -DEXTRA_WARNINGS=ON does find a lot of stuff, like unused comments.

Xcode enables shorten-64-to-32 by default, which is, I assume, is not covered by Wall. I can reproduce the same behaviour by adding the option to the cmake config, see attached. Oddly, Xcode disables sign-compare by default. Both are worth having enabled in my opinion.

Wshorten-64-to-32.log.zip

@lgritz
Copy link
Collaborator

lgritz commented Aug 23, 2023

Sorry, my bad. We always enable -Wall. What I meant is -Wextra, which is turned on by the EXTRA_WARNINGS cmake variable. I guess "all" isn't really "all"!

Here's what I think we should do:

  • Let's take our hands off of this jumbled PR for the moment.

  • If EXTRA_WARNINGS doesn't catch all of these (i.e., if -Wextra doesn't implicitly include shorten-64-to-32, then let's add -Wshorten-64-to-32 to the clause here so that we have a way to enable it easily in the build, optionally.

  • Let's then attack the warnings bit by bit, not all in one PR, but go one area or issue at a time of some related warnings (such as, just the ones in the TIFF plugin as one batch) so we can get consensus on the right way to solve it. For some of them, such as ones that touch public header files and may affect downstream projects, we should proceed very cautiously.

@antond-weta
Copy link
Contributor Author

Sounds good.

Larry, while we are looking at warnings, could you check this one. Shouldn't there be logical and, not bitwise? Am I missing something?
https://github.com/OpenImageIO/oiio/blob/56c734a6752d2a03af3455c50967e1f7a3835d92/src/libtexture/texturesys.cpp#L2349-L2358

@lgritz
Copy link
Collaborator

lgritz commented Aug 23, 2023

That one is intentionally bitwise, for performance reasons. (&& is short-circuited, i.e. there is an implied branch.) The pragma immediately before that is to disable the warning because we really do want this the way we wrote it.

@lgritz
Copy link
Collaborator

lgritz commented Aug 23, 2023

By the way, a lot of what you did on this PR is just fine. Part of asking to step back and turn them into smaller PRs is to cleave off the good ones from the ones that require some more thought. For example, all the ones of this nature:

    int numImg = m_images.size();

changing to size_t, those are fine and good to change since obviously vector::size() returns size_t and so it's weird that we ever assigned that to an int.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants