[Bug tree-optimization/18501] [8/9/10/11 Regression] Missing 'used uninitialized' warning (CCP)

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

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18501

--- Comment #96 from Martin Sebor  ---
*** Bug 89202 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

[Bug tree-optimization/18501] [8/9/10/11 Regression] Missing 'used uninitialized' warning (CCP)

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

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18501

Martin Sebor  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

  Known to fail||10.2.0, 11.0, 4.7.0, 4.8.4,
   ||4.9.4, 5.5.0, 6.4.0, 7.2.0,
   ||8.3.0, 9.1.0
   Last reconfirmed|2018-11-03 00:00:00 |2021-4-7
   See Also|https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill |
   |a/show_bug.cgi?id=24639 |

--- Comment #95 from Martin Sebor  ---
Reconfirmed with GCC 11.

I wonder if running CCP first, just before the early uninit pass, but only to
propagate constants and without modifying the CFG, and then the "late"
uninitialized pass to look for uninitialized operands in the PHIs while
evaluating the predicates using the CCP lattice values, would be a way to get
back the warnings without introducing false positives.

[Bug tree-optimization/18501] [8/9/10/11 Regression] Missing 'used uninitialized' warning (CCP)

[manu at gcc dot gnu.org]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18501

Manuel López-Ibáñez  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||felix at piedallu dot me

--- Comment #94 from Manuel López-Ibáñez  ---
*** Bug 96368 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***