https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81981
--- Comment #9 from Vincent Lefèvre ---
Note, however, that there is a small regression in GCC 11: the warning for t is
output as expected, but if -fsanitize=undefined is given, the message for t is
suboptimal, saying "*[0]" instead of "t[0]":
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81981
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|REOPENED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81981
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to fail||12.0
Known to work|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81981
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81981
--- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Fixed.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81981
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Mon Sep 4 08:11:44 2017
New Revision: 251641
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=251641=gcc=rev
Log:
PR sanitizer/81981
* gimple-fold.c (gimple_fold_call): Optimize
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81981
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81981
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||diagnostic,
|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81981
--- Comment #2 from Marek Polacek ---
Looks like the problem is that since that revision in .uninit there's
UBSAN_PTR (, 0);
and so the warning probably thinks that t escapes and so doesn't warn.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81981
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
10 matches
Mail list logo
