Bbbkkmnmnkkkkkkkkkkkkkb j

2022-11-16 Thread Silvestre Rilles via Gcc
Sent from my iPhone

Re: How can Autoconf help with the transition to stricter compilation defaults?

2022-11-16 Thread Zack Weinberg via Gcc
On Wed, Nov 16, 2022, at 1:17 PM, Paul Eggert wrote: ... > If Clang's threatened pickiness were of some real use elsewhere, it > might be justifiable for default Clang to break Autoconf. But so far we > haven't seen real-world uses that would justify this pickiness for > Autoconf's use of 'char

Re: How can Autoconf help with the transition to stricter compilation defaults?

2022-11-16 Thread Jeffrey Walton via Gcc
On Wed, Nov 16, 2022 at 1:18 PM Paul Eggert wrote: > ... > If Clang's threatened pickiness were of some real use elsewhere, it > might be justifiable for default Clang to break Autoconf. But so far we > haven't seen real-world uses that would justify this pickiness for > Autoconf's use of 'char me

Re: How can Autoconf help with the transition to stricter compilation defaults?

2022-11-16 Thread Paul Eggert
On 2022-11-16 06:26, Michael Matz wrote: char foobar(void); int main(void) { return &foobar != 0; } That still has undefined behavior according to draft C23, which says behavior is undefined when foobar is (say) 'memset_explicit' because the declaration 'char memset_explicit(void);' disagr

Re: How can Autoconf help with the transition to stricter compilation defaults?

2022-11-16 Thread Jonathan Wakely via Gcc
On Wed, 16 Nov 2022 at 16:34, Michael Matz wrote: > > Hello, > > On Wed, 16 Nov 2022, Jonathan Wakely wrote: > > > > > Unrelated but I was a bit tempted to ask for throwing in > > > > -Wbuiltin-declaration-mismatch to default -Werror while Clang 16 was at > > > > it, but I suppose we don't want th

Re: How can Autoconf help with the transition to stricter compilation defaults?

2022-11-16 Thread Michael Matz via Gcc
Hello, On Wed, 16 Nov 2022, Jonathan Wakely wrote: > > > Unrelated but I was a bit tempted to ask for throwing in > > > -Wbuiltin-declaration-mismatch to default -Werror while Clang 16 was at > > > it, but I suppose we don't want the world to burn too much, > > > > :-) It's IMHO a bug in the sta

Re: How can Autoconf help with the transition to stricter compilation defaults?

2022-11-16 Thread Jonathan Wakely via Gcc
On Wed, 16 Nov 2022 at 15:59, Michael Matz wrote: > > Hello, > > On Wed, 16 Nov 2022, Sam James wrote: > > > Unrelated but I was a bit tempted to ask for throwing in > > -Wbuiltin-declaration-mismatch to default -Werror while Clang 16 was at > > it, but I suppose we don't want the world to burn to

Re: How can Autoconf help with the transition to stricter compilation defaults?

2022-11-16 Thread Michael Matz via Gcc
Hello, On Wed, 16 Nov 2022, Sam James wrote: > Unrelated but I was a bit tempted to ask for throwing in > -Wbuiltin-declaration-mismatch to default -Werror while Clang 16 was at > it, but I suppose we don't want the world to burn too much, :-) It's IMHO a bug in the standard that it misses "i

Re: How can Autoconf help with the transition to stricter compilation defaults?

2022-11-16 Thread Sam James via Gcc
> On 16 Nov 2022, at 15:27, Richard Biener wrote: > > On Wed, Nov 16, 2022 at 4:02 PM Michael Matz via Gcc wrote: >> >> Hey, >> >> On Wed, 16 Nov 2022, Alexander Monakov wrote: >> The idea is so obvious that I'm probably missing something, why autoconf can't use that idiom instead

Re: How can Autoconf help with the transition to stricter compilation defaults?

2022-11-16 Thread Richard Biener via Gcc
On Wed, Nov 16, 2022 at 4:02 PM Michael Matz via Gcc wrote: > > Hey, > > On Wed, 16 Nov 2022, Alexander Monakov wrote: > > > > The idea is so obvious that I'm probably missing something, why autoconf > > > can't use that idiom instead. But perhaps the (historic?) reasons why it > > > couldn't be

Re: How can Autoconf help with the transition to stricter compilation defaults?

2022-11-16 Thread Michael Matz via Gcc
Hey, On Wed, 16 Nov 2022, Alexander Monakov wrote: > > The idea is so obvious that I'm probably missing something, why autoconf > > can't use that idiom instead. But perhaps the (historic?) reasons why it > > couldn't be used are gone now? > > Ironically, modern GCC and LLVM optimize '&foobar

Re: How can Autoconf help with the transition to stricter compilation defaults?

2022-11-16 Thread Alexander Monakov via Gcc
On Wed, 16 Nov 2022, Michael Matz via Gcc wrote: > I sympathize, and I would think a compiler emitting an error (not a > warning) in the situation at hand (in absence of -Werror) is overly > pedantic. But, could autoconf perhaps avoid the problem? AFAICS the > ac_fn_c_check_func really does

Re: How can Autoconf help with the transition to stricter compilation defaults?

2022-11-16 Thread Michael Matz via Gcc
Hi, On Tue, 15 Nov 2022, Paul Eggert wrote: > On 2022-11-15 11:27, Jonathan Wakely wrote: > > Another perspective is that autoconf shouldn't get in the way of > > making the C and C++ toolchain more secure by default. > > Can you cite any examples of a real-world security flaw what would be > f

[RISC-V] [SIG-toolchain] Meeting will be canceled (Nov 17, 2022)

2022-11-16 Thread jiawei
Hi all, Tomorrow's meeting will be canceled, since there was few new topics to discuss. The next RISC-V GNU Toolchain meeting will be held on Dec 1. Please let me know if you have any topics want to discuss in the next meeting. Best Regards, Jiawei

About -fasan-shadow-offset option

2022-11-16 Thread tao.z...@amlogic.com
Dear gcc: I am developing a address sanitiser tools for u-boot. Basically refers compile options from kernel side. But there is a problem that I must set -fasan-shadow-offset with a pre-calculated value. Otherwise GCC compiler will use 0x10 as default value for shadow offset and cau