Here is a very simplified program which reproduces the issue I faced in the real application:
#include "stdlib.h"
typedef unsigned short int shft;
struct xptr {
int layer;
void * addr;
xptr() : layer(0), addr(NULL) {}
xptr(int _layer, void *_addr) : layer(_layer), addr(_addr) {}
xptr(const xptr& x) { layer = x.layer; addr = x.addr; }
/* Uncomment this to remove the bug */
/* const xptr& operator= (const xptr& rhs)
{
if (this != &rhs) {
this->addr = rhs.addr;
this->layer = rhs.layer;
}
return *this;
}*/
};
struct n_dsc {
xptr pdsc;
xptr ldsc;
xptr rdsc;
};
void dm_string_value_traverse(xptr node)
{
xptr p = node;
while (p.addr != 0)
{
p = ((n_dsc*)p.addr)->rdsc;
}
}
int main()
{
n_dsc n1, n2;
n1.rdsc = xptr(0, &n2);
xptr n = xptr(0, &n1);
dm_string_value_traverse(n);
}
I absolutely could not understand why CL 2008 (with /Og /Zi /W4) generates the following assembly for the "dm_string_value_traverse" function:
while (p.addr != 0)
004ABAC5 mov eax,dword ptr [esp+10h]
004ABAC9 add esp,0Ch
004ABACC test eax,eax
004ABACE je dm_string_value_traverse+5Fh (4ABADFh)
{
p = ((n_dsc*)p.addr)->rdsc;
004ABAD0 mov ecx,dword ptr [eax+1Ch]
004ABAD3 mov dword ptr [esp],ecx
004ABAD6 mov eax,dword ptr [eax+20h]
004ABAD9 mov dword ptr [esp+4],eax
004ABADD jmp dm_string_value_traverse+50h (4ABAD0h) ;NOTE THIS JMP TO THE ASSIGNMENT
}
}
Is it possible to understand why this is going on? Is there a way to workaround this?
This looks like an overzealous optimizer. I can confirm the behavior you describe with Visual Studio 2008 SP1, /Og, and /Fa for assembly output. This wouldn't be the first time for VC: try google visual c++ "/Og" site:support.microsoft.com.
One workaround is to iterate with an xptr pointer, instead of an xptr value. This also has the beneficial side-effect of reducing the number of bytes copied on each iteration from 8 (xptr value) to 4 (xptr pointer).
void dm_string_value_traverse(xptr node)
{
xptr *p = &node;
while (p->addr != 0)
{
p = &(((n_dsc*)(p->addr))->rdsc);
}
}
The resulting assembly code, with /Og, now looks like this. I can't map the assembly exactly to the source code, as the comparison (p->addr != 0)
now happens in two places. It is clear, however, that the loop now includes a test for its end condition.
; prolog
push ebp
mov ebp, esp
; while (p->addr != 0)
mov eax, DWORD PTR _node$[ebp+4]
test eax, eax
je SHORT $LN1@dm_string_
npad 6
; p = &(((n_dsc*)p->addr)->rdsc);
$LL2@dm_string_:
mov eax, DWORD PTR [eax+20]
test eax, eax
jne SHORT $LL2@dm_string_
$LN1@dm_string_:
; epilog
pop ebp
ret 0
Given how intractable this class of bug is, there may be similar issues lurking invisible in the code. For the portion of the code that deals with xptr's and n_dsc's, you might want to consider going without /Og, or unit-testing it all around.