https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101830
--- Comment #13 from Bill Schmidt ---
Yes, absolutely right on safe_inc_pos, will address that as well. Much
obliged!
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101830
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|INVALID |FIXED
--- Comment #12 from Martin Sebor
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101830
Bill Schmidt changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101830
--- Comment #10 from Bill Schmidt ---
As a reminder, the code compiled fine with no warnings until the rewrite of the
back-threader. Based on the IL example above, it looks to me like the new pass
is not producing a self-consistent CFG in all c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101830
--- Comment #9 from Bill Schmidt ---
But it doesn't explain the bogus IL in the previous message.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101830
--- Comment #8 from Martin Sebor ---
Created attachment 51298
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=51298&action=edit
Change to test case that avoids -Warray-bounds.
The attached change to test case avoids all -Warray-bounds inst
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101830
--- Comment #7 from Bill Schmidt ---
Sorry, but that IL looks very strange to me.
BB 5 should be going directly to BB 8, and the value of interest along that
path is pos.80_31. But BB 8 says that it only gets pos.80 from BB 36, and the
value a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101830
--- Comment #6 from Martin Sebor ---
I've only looked at the first warning so far. It's issued for the access in bb
8:
[local count: 4057510040]:
pos.80_31 = pos;
if (pos.80_31 <= 1023)
goto ; [96.34%]
else
goto ; [3.66%]
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101830
--- Comment #5 from Bill Schmidt ---
If I commit the build patch, everyone who doesn't build with --disable-werror
will blame me for breaking bootstrap.
I thought perhaps the way safe_inc_pos was implemented might have made it
possible for the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101830
--- Comment #4 from Segher Boessenkool ---
(In reply to Bill Schmidt from comment #0)
> (1) linebuf and pos are global variables, and the compiler cannot tell
> whether or not there are problems with array bounds accesses here. Indeed,
> pos is
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101830
--- Comment #3 from Bill Schmidt ---
Created attachment 51281
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=51281&action=edit
Preprocessed source
Per request, preprocessed source.
Compile with "g++ rs6000-gen-builtins.ii -c -O2 -Wall -W
11 matches
Mail list logo
