aboutsummaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
path: root/src/backend/jit/llvm/llvmjit_expr.c
diff options
context:
space:
mode:
authorTom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>2024-11-25 18:08:58 -0500
committerTom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>2024-11-25 18:09:09 -0500
commit5b8728cd7f9d3d93b6ff9b48887084fdf0a46e4f (patch)
treeb62eee91b8fa0d602753987f1a1c00aa0b7bb01f /src/backend/jit/llvm/llvmjit_expr.c
parent4ba84de459532a7a79616e756f8bfd45ba4b8048 (diff)
downloadpostgresql-5b8728cd7f9d3d93b6ff9b48887084fdf0a46e4f.tar.gz
postgresql-5b8728cd7f9d3d93b6ff9b48887084fdf0a46e4f.zip
Fix NULLIF()'s handling of read-write expanded objects.
If passed a read-write expanded object pointer, the EEOP_NULLIF code would hand that same pointer to the equality function and then (unless equality was reported) also return the same pointer as its value. This is no good, because a function that receives a read-write expanded object pointer is fully entitled to scribble on or even delete the object, thus corrupting the NULLIF output. (This problem is likely unobservable with the equality functions provided in core Postgres, but it's easy to demonstrate with one coded in plpgsql.) To fix, make sure the pointer passed to the equality function is read-only. We can still return the original read-write pointer as the NULLIF result, allowing optimization of later operations. Per bug #18722 from Alexander Lakhin. This has been wrong since we invented expanded objects, so back-patch to all supported branches. Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/18722-fd9e645448cc78b4@postgresql.org
Diffstat (limited to 'src/backend/jit/llvm/llvmjit_expr.c')
-rw-r--r--src/backend/jit/llvm/llvmjit_expr.c33
1 files changed, 29 insertions, 4 deletions
diff --git a/src/backend/jit/llvm/llvmjit_expr.c b/src/backend/jit/llvm/llvmjit_expr.c
index 9cec17544b8..c533f552540 100644
--- a/src/backend/jit/llvm/llvmjit_expr.c
+++ b/src/backend/jit/llvm/llvmjit_expr.c
@@ -1559,6 +1559,9 @@ llvm_compile_expr(ExprState *state)
v_fcinfo = l_ptr_const(fcinfo, l_ptr(StructFunctionCallInfoData));
+ /* save original arg[0] */
+ v_arg0 = l_funcvalue(b, v_fcinfo, 0);
+
/* if either argument is NULL they can't be equal */
v_argnull0 = l_funcnull(b, v_fcinfo, 0);
v_argnull1 = l_funcnull(b, v_fcinfo, 1);
@@ -1575,7 +1578,6 @@ llvm_compile_expr(ExprState *state)
/* one (or both) of the arguments are null, return arg[0] */
LLVMPositionBuilderAtEnd(b, b_hasnull);
- v_arg0 = l_funcvalue(b, v_fcinfo, 0);
LLVMBuildStore(b, v_argnull0, v_resnullp);
LLVMBuildStore(b, v_arg0, v_resvaluep);
LLVMBuildBr(b, opblocks[opno + 1]);
@@ -1583,12 +1585,35 @@ llvm_compile_expr(ExprState *state)
/* build block to invoke function and check result */
LLVMPositionBuilderAtEnd(b, b_nonull);
+ /*
+ * If first argument is of varlena type, it might be an
+ * expanded datum. We need to ensure that the value
+ * passed to the comparison function is a read-only
+ * pointer. However, if we end by returning the first
+ * argument, that will be the original read-write pointer
+ * if it was read-write.
+ */
+ if (op->d.func.make_ro)
+ {
+ LLVMValueRef v_params[1];
+ LLVMValueRef v_arg0_ro;
+
+ v_params[0] = v_arg0;
+ v_arg0_ro =
+ l_call(b,
+ llvm_pg_var_func_type("MakeExpandedObjectReadOnlyInternal"),
+ llvm_pg_func(mod, "MakeExpandedObjectReadOnlyInternal"),
+ v_params, lengthof(v_params), "");
+ LLVMBuildStore(b, v_arg0_ro,
+ l_funcvaluep(b, v_fcinfo, 0));
+ }
+
v_retval = BuildV1Call(context, b, mod, fcinfo, &v_fcinfo_isnull);
/*
- * If result not null, and arguments are equal return null
- * (same result as if there'd been NULLs, hence reuse
- * b_hasnull).
+ * If result not null and arguments are equal return null,
+ * else return arg[0] (same result as if there'd been
+ * NULLs, hence reuse b_hasnull).
*/
v_argsequal = LLVMBuildAnd(b,
LLVMBuildICmp(b, LLVMIntEQ,