[Bug bootstrap/62005] [4.10 regression] with --enable-checking=rtl : loop-unroll.c:2095:10: error: function may return address of local variable
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62005 Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|--- |FIXED --- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org --- Author: jakub Date: Tue Aug 5 08:09:00 2014 New Revision: 213621 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=213621root=gccview=rev Log: * loop-unroll.c (struct iv_to_split): Remove n_loc and loc fields. (analyze_iv_to_split_insn): Don't initialize them. (get_ivts_expr): Removed. (allocate_basic_variable, insert_base_initialization): Use SET_SRC instead of *get_ivts_expr. (split_iv): Use SET_SRC instead of get_ivts_expr. Modified: trunk/gcc/ChangeLog trunk/gcc/loop-unroll.c
[Bug bootstrap/62005] [4.10 regression] with --enable-checking=rtl : loop-unroll.c:2095:10: error: function may return address of local variable
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62005 Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||glisse at gcc dot gnu.org Target Milestone|--- |4.10.0 --- Comment #1 from Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org --- Hmm, the warning is true if ivts-n_loc == 0. Marc?
[Bug bootstrap/62005] [4.10 regression] with --enable-checking=rtl : loop-unroll.c:2095:10: error: function may return address of local variable
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62005 --- Comment #2 from Marc Glisse glisse at gcc dot gnu.org --- Ah, I didn't test with --enable-ckecking=rtl. We could split the maybe part of the warning and downgrade it to Wextra, but I'd rather keep it at least in Wall, which means we need to change the loop-unroll code anyway. The code is not easy to understand. For instance, I don't see where n_loc can be set to any value other than 1? That would make it easy to simplify this loop...
[Bug bootstrap/62005] [4.10 regression] with --enable-checking=rtl : loop-unroll.c:2095:10: error: function may return address of local variable
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62005 Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org --- I've posted a loop-unroll.c fix. That said, an interesting question is why we don't warn about this without rtl checking, the function still returns address of the parameter. Is that because it is inlined in that case and so we don't warn then?
[Bug bootstrap/62005] [4.10 regression] with --enable-checking=rtl : loop-unroll.c:2095:10: error: function may return address of local variable
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62005 --- Comment #4 from Marc Glisse glisse at gcc dot gnu.org --- (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #3) That said, an interesting question is why we don't warn about this without rtl checking, the function still returns address of the parameter. Is that because it is inlined in that case and so we don't warn then? That seems likely, RTL checking may make the function large enough not to be inlined. Compiling without RTL checking but with -fkeep-inline-functions probably warns as well then.
[Bug bootstrap/62005] [4.10 regression] with --enable-checking=rtl : loop-unroll.c:2095:10: error: function may return address of local variable
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62005 --- Comment #5 from Marc Glisse glisse at gcc dot gnu.org --- (In reply to Marc Glisse from comment #4) Compiling without RTL checking but with -fkeep-inline-functions probably warns as well then. Uh, for some reason -fkeep-inline-functions does not preserve static functions, but it does preserve static inline functions (so it warns if I add inline on the definition of get_ivts_expr). I couldn't find a -fkeep-static-functions.
