[Bug middle-end/89428] missing -Wstringop-overflow on a PHI with variable offset

2020-11-29 Thread msebor at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89428

Martin Sebor  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
 Resolution|--- |FIXED
   Target Milestone|--- |11.0

--- Comment #6 from Martin Sebor  ---
Resolved by  r11-5523 for GCC 11 which now issues the following warnings for
the test case in comment #0 (the duplicate note needs to be fixed):

$ gcc -O2 -S pr89428.c
pr89428.c: In function ‘f’:
pr89428.c:7:3: warning: ‘__builtin_memset’ writing 7 bytes into a region of
size 6 overflows the destination [-Wstringop-overflow=]
7 |   __builtin_memset (a + i, 0, 7);   // warning (good)
  |   ^~
pr89428.c:1:6: note: at offset [1, 2] into destination object ‘a’ of size 7
1 | char a[7];
  |  ^
pr89428.c: In function ‘g’:
pr89428.c:14:3: warning: ‘__builtin_memset’ writing 99 bytes into a region of
size 7 overflows the destination [-Wstringop-overflow=]
   14 |   __builtin_memset (a + i, 0, 99);   // missing warning (bug)
  |   ^~~
pr89428.c:1:6: note: destination object ‘a’ of size 7
1 | char a[7];
  |  ^
pr89428.c:1:6: note: destination object ‘a’ of size 7

[Bug middle-end/89428] missing -Wstringop-overflow on a PHI with variable offset

2020-11-29 Thread cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89428

--- Comment #5 from CVS Commits  ---
The master branch has been updated by Martin Sebor :

https://gcc.gnu.org/g:eafe8ee7af13c39805ea09bbf5b4f9ab2a48304a

commit r11-5523-geafe8ee7af13c39805ea09bbf5b4f9ab2a48304a
Author: Martin Sebor 
Date:   Sun Nov 29 15:09:30 2020 -0700

Handle PHIs in compute_objsize.

PR middle-end/92936 - missing warning on a past-the-end store to a PHI
PR middle-end/92940 - incorrect offset and size in -Wstringop-overflow for
out-of-bounds store into VLA and two offset ranges
PR middle-end/89428 - missing -Wstringop-overflow on a PHI with variable
offset

gcc/ChangeLog:

PR middle-end/92936
PR middle-end/92940
PR middle-end/89428
* builtins.c (access_ref::access_ref): Initialize member.
(access_ref::phi): New function.
(access_ref::get_ref): New function.
(access_ref::add_offset): Remove duplicate assignment.
(maybe_warn_for_bound): Add "maybe" kind of warning messages.
(warn_for_access): Same.
(inform_access): Rename...
(access_ref::inform_access): ...to this.  Print PHI arguments. 
Format
offset the same as size and simplify.  Improve printing of
allocation
functions and VLAs.
(check_access): Adjust to the above.
(gimple_parm_array_size): Change argument.
(handle_min_max_size): New function.
* builtins.h (class ssa_name_limit_t): Move class here from
tree-ssa-strlen.c.
(struct access_ref): Declare new members.
(gimple_parm_array_size): Change argument.
* tree-ssa-strlen.c (maybe_warn_overflow): Use access_ref and
simplify.
(handle_builtin_memcpy): Correct argument passed to
maybe_warn_overflow.
(handle_builtin_memset): Same.
(class ssa_name_limit_t): Move class to builtins.{h,c}.

gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog:

PR middle-end/92936
PR middle-end/92940
PR middle-end/89428
* c-c++-common/Wstringop-overflow-2.c: Adjust text of expected
informational notes.
* g++.dg/warn/Wstringop-overflow-3.C: Same.
* g++.dg/warn/Wplacement-new-size.C: Remove a test for a no longer
issued warning.
* gcc.dg/Warray-bounds-43.c: Removed unused declarations.
* gcc.dg/Wstringop-overflow-11.c: Remove xfails.
* gcc.dg/Wstringop-overflow-12.c: Same.
* gcc.dg/Wstringop-overflow-17.c: Adjust text of expected messages.
* gcc.dg/Wstringop-overflow-27.c: Same.  Remove xfails.
* gcc.dg/Wstringop-overflow-28.c: Adjust text of expected messages.
* gcc.dg/Wstringop-overflow-29.c: Same.
* gcc.dg/Wstringop-overflow-37.c: Same.
* gcc.dg/Wstringop-overflow-46.c: Same.
* gcc.dg/Wstringop-overflow-47.c: Same.
* gcc.dg/Wstringop-overflow-54.c: Same.
* gcc.dg/warn-strnlen-no-nul.c: Add expected warning.
* gcc.dg/Wstringop-overflow-7.c: New test.
* gcc.dg/Wstringop-overflow-58.c: New test.
* gcc.dg/Wstringop-overflow-59.c: New test.
* gcc.dg/Wstringop-overflow-60.c: New test.
* gcc.dg/Wstringop-overflow-61.c: New test.
* gcc.dg/Wstringop-overflow-62.c: New test.
* gcc.dg/Wstringop-overflow-63.c: New test.
* gcc.dg/Wstringop-overflow-64.c: New test.

[Bug middle-end/89428] missing -Wstringop-overflow on a PHI with variable offset

2020-11-03 Thread msebor at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89428

Martin Sebor  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Keywords||patch
 Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
   Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org  |msebor at gcc dot 
gnu.org

--- Comment #4 from Martin Sebor  ---
Fixed in the following patch for pr92936:
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2020-November/557807.html

[Bug middle-end/89428] missing -Wstringop-overflow on a PHI with variable offset

2020-10-29 Thread msebor at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89428

Martin Sebor  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
   ||a/show_bug.cgi?id=92936

--- Comment #3 from Martin Sebor  ---
See also pr92936.

[Bug middle-end/89428] missing -Wstringop-overflow on a PHI with variable offset

2020-04-26 Thread xerofoify at gmail dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89428

Nicholas Krause  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||xerofoify at gmail dot com

--- Comment #2 from Nicholas Krause  ---
Changing i equal to 1 in the second function gives the warning and gets similar
GIMPLE like this to the first function:

 [local count: 1073741824]:
  i_3 = MAX_EXPR ;
  _1 = &a + i_3;   
  __builtin_memset (_1, 0, 99); [tail call]
  return;  

Are we assuming somewhere that zero size offsets should for the first argument
of __builtin_memset to be forgotten about? Because I tried it with multiple
numbers other than zero and they all worked to get GIMPLE similar to the above.

[Bug middle-end/89428] missing -Wstringop-overflow on a PHI with variable offset

2020-04-22 Thread msebor at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89428

Martin Sebor  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

  Known to fail||10.0, 9.2.0
   Last reconfirmed||2020-04-22
 Ever confirmed|0   |1
 Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW

--- Comment #1 from Martin Sebor  ---
No progress in GCC 10.