Hi, Sergey,

thanks for the patch! LGTM with nit below


On 25.06.2024 18:54, Sergey Kaplun wrote:
> From: Mike Pall <mike>
>
> Reported by minoki.
> Recent C compilers 'take advantage' of the undefined behavior.
> This completely changes the meaning of expressions like (k == -k).
>
> (cherry picked from commit 8a5e398c52c7f8ca3e1a0e574cc2ba38224b759b)
>
> This patch changes all possibly dangerous -x operations on integers to
> the corresponding two's complement. Also, it removes all related UBSAN
> suppressions, since they are fixed.
>
> Also, this patch limits the `bit.tohex()` result by 254 characters.
>
> There is no testcase for `strscan_oct()`, `strscan_dec()` or/and
> `STRSCAN_U32` format since first the unary minus is parsed first and
> only after the number itself is parsed during parsing C syntax. So the
> error is raised in `cp_expr_prefix()` instead. For parsing the exponent
> header, there is no testcase, since the power is limited by
> `STRSCAN_MAXEXP`.
>
> Sergey Kaplun:
> * added the description and the test for the problem
>
> Part of tarantool/tarantool#9924
> Relates to tarantool/tarantool#8473
> ---

<snipped>


> diff --git a/test/tarantool-tests/lj-928-int-min-negation.test.lua b/test/tarantool-tests/lj-928-int-min-negation.test.lua
> new file mode 100644
> index 00000000..26f4ed8e
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/test/tarantool-tests/lj-928-int-min-negation.test.lua
> @@ -0,0 +1,121 @@
> +local tap = require('tap')
> +
> +-- Test file to demonstrate LuaJIT's UBSan failures during
> +-- `INT*_MIN` negation.
> +-- See also:https://github.com/LuaJIT/LuaJIT/issues/928.
> +
> +local test = tap.test('lj-928-int-min-negation.'):skipcond({

dot could be omitted in a test's name.


> +  ['Test requires JIT enabled'] = not jit.status(),
> +})
> +
> +local INT32_MIN = -0x80000000
> +local INT64_MIN = -0x8000000000000000
> +local TOBIT_CHAR_MAX = 254
> +
> +-- XXX: Many tests (`tonumber()`-related) are failed under UBSan
> +-- with DUALNUM enabled. They are included to avoid regressions in
> +-- the future if such a build becomes the default.
> +local ffi = require('ffi')
> +local LL_T = ffi.typeof(1LL)
> +
> +test:plan(14)
> +
> +jit.opt.start('hotloop=1')
> +
> +-- Temporary variable for the results.
> +local r
> +
> +-- <src/lj_vmmath.c>:`lj_vm_modi()`
> +for _ = 1, 4 do
> +  -- Use additional variables to avoid folding during parsing.
> +  -- Operands should be constants on the trace.
> +  local x = -0x80000000
> +  local y = -0x80000000
> +  r = x % y
> +end
> +test:is(r, 0, 'no UB during lj_vm_modi')
> +
> +-- <src/lj_strfmt.c>:`lj_strfmt_wint()`
> +for _ = 1, 4 do
> +  -- Operand should be the constant on the trace.
> +  r = tostring(bit.tobit(0x80000000))
> +end
> +test:is(r, '-2147483648', 'no UB during lj_strfmt_wint')
> +
> +-- <src/lj_strfmt.c>:`lj_strfmt_putfxint()`
> +test:is(('%d'):format(INT64_MIN), '-9223372036854775808',
> +        'no UB during lj_strfmt_putfxint')
> +
> +-- <src/lj_parse.c>:`bcemit_unop()`
> +local int64_min_cdata = -0x8000000000000000LL
> +test:ok(true, 'no UB during bcemit_unop')
> +
> +-- <src/lj_carith.c>:`carith_int64()`
> +-- Use the additional variable to avoid folding during
> +-- `bcemit_unop()`.
> +test:is(-int64_min_cdata, int64_min_cdata, 'no UB during carith_int64')
> +
> +-- <src/lj_ctype.c>:`lj_ctype_repr_int64()`
> +-- Use cast to separate the test case from `bcemit_unop()`.
> +test:is(tostring(LL_T(INT64_MIN)), '-9223372036854775808LL',
> +        'no UB during lj_ctype_repr_int64')
> +
> +local TOHEX_EXPECTED = ('0'):rep(TOBIT_CHAR_MAX)
> +-- <src/lib_bit.c>:`bit_tohex()`
> +-- The second argument is the number of bytes to be represented.
> +-- The negative value stands for uppercase.
> +test:is(bit.tohex(0, INT32_MIN), TOHEX_EXPECTED, 'no UB during bit_tohex')
> +
> +-- <src/lj_crecord.c>:`recff_bit64_tohex()`
> +-- The second argument is the number of bytes to be represented.
> +-- The negative value stands for uppercase.
> +for _ = 1, 4 do
> +  -- The second argument should be the constant on the trace.
> +  r = bit.tohex(0, -0x80000000)
> +end
> +test:is(r, TOHEX_EXPECTED, 'no UB during recording bit.tohex')
> +
> +-- <src/lj_opt_fold.c>:`simplify_intsub_k()`
> +r = 0
> +for _ = 1, 4 do
> +  r = r - 0x8000000000000000LL
> +end
> +test:is(r, 0LL, 'no UB during simplify_intsub_k')
> +
> +-- <src/lj_strscan.c>:`strscan_hex()`
> +test:is(tonumber('-0x80000000'), INT32_MIN, 'no UB during strscan_hex')
> +
> +-- <src/lj_strscan.c>:`strscan_bin()`
> +test:is(tonumber('-0b10000000000000000000000000000000'), INT32_MIN,
> +        'no UB during strscan_bin')
> +
> +-- <src/lj_strscan.c>:`lj_strscan_scan()`
> +test:is(tonumber('-2147483648'), INT32_MIN, 'no UB during strscan_scan')
> +
> +-- Test for 32bit long, just in case.
> +-- <src/lib_base.c>:`tonumber()`
> +test:is(tonumber('-2000000000000000', 4), INT32_MIN,
> +        'no UB during tonumber, base 4')
> +
> +-- <src/lj_cparse.c>:`cp_expr_prefix()`
> +-- According to ISO/IEC 9899:2023 [1]:
> +-- | Each constant expression shall evaluate to a constant that is
> +-- | in the range of representable values for its type.
> +-- It means that since 0x80000000 does not fit in the int32_t
> +-- range, -0x80000000 does not fit in the int32_t range either.
> +--
> +-- In the case when the enumeration has no fixed underlying type,
> +-- the type of the enum is implementation defined [2][3].
> +--
> +-- Hence, we used -INT32_MAX - 1 since both values fit into
> +-- int32_t, so it can't be ambiguous.
> +--
> +-- luacheck: ignore (too long line)
> +-- [1]:https://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg14/www/docs/n3096.pdf#subsection.6.2.6
> +-- [2]:https://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg14/www/docs/n1256.pdf#%5B%7B%22num%22%3A232%2C%22gen%22%3A0%7D%2C%7B%22name%22%3A%22Fit%22%7D%5D
> +-- [3]:https://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg14/www/docs/n3096.pdf#subsubsection.6.7.2.2
> +ffi.cdef[[typedef enum {enum_int32_min = -0x7fffffff - 1} enum_t;]]
> +test:is(ffi.new('enum_t', 'enum_int32_min'), LL_T(INT32_MIN),
> +        'no UB during cp_expr_prefix')
> +
> +test:done(true)