[Bug middle-end/112336] fsanitize=address vs _BitInt with a non-mode size (smaller than max mode size)

[jakub at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112336

Jakub Jelinek  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org  |jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
 Status|NEW |ASSIGNED

--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek  ---
Created attachment 56667
  --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=56667&action=edit
gcc14-pr112336.patch

Untested fix.

[Bug middle-end/112336] fsanitize=address vs _BitInt with a non-mode size (smaller than max mode size)

[cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112336

--- Comment #5 from CVS Commits  ---
The master branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek :

https://gcc.gnu.org/g:f9982ef4f55bd3a63745e03ac6d68b4a92fa8bce

commit r14-5776-gf9982ef4f55bd3a63745e03ac6d68b4a92fa8bce
Author: Jakub Jelinek 
Date:   Thu Nov 23 12:59:54 2023 +0100

expr: Fix &bitint_var handling in initializers [PR112336]

As the following testcase shows, we ICE when trying to emit ADDR_EXPR of
a bitint variable which doesn't have mode width.
The problem is in the EXTEND_BITINT stuff which makes sure we treat the
padding bits on memory reads from user bitint vars as undefined.
When expanding ADDR_EXPR on such vars inside outside of initializers,
expand_expr_addr* uses EXPAND_CONST_ADDRESS modifier and EXTEND_BITINT
does nothing, but in initializers it keeps using EXPAND_INITIALIZER
modifier.  So, we need to treat EXPAND_INITIALIZER the same as
EXPAND_CONST_ADDRESS for this regard.

2023-11-23  Jakub Jelinek  

PR middle-end/112336
* expr.cc (EXTEND_BITINT): Don't call reduce_to_bit_field_precision
if modifier is EXPAND_INITIALIZER.

* gcc.dg/bitint-41.c: New test.

[Bug middle-end/112336] fsanitize=address vs _BitInt with a non-mode size (smaller than max mode size)

[jakub at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112336

Jakub Jelinek  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Resolution|--- |FIXED
 Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED

--- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek  ---
Should be fixed now.

[Bug middle-end/112336] fsanitize=address vs _BitInt with a non-mode size (smaller than max mode size)

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112336

Andrew Pinski  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Target Milestone|--- |14.0

[Bug middle-end/112336] fsanitize=address vs _BitInt with a non-mode size (smaller than max mode size)

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112336

Andrew Pinski  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||iamanonymous.cs at gmail dot 
com

--- Comment #7 from Andrew Pinski  ---
*** Bug 112695 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***