https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84468
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84468
--- Comment #17 from Martin Sebor ---
Author: msebor
Date: Wed Mar 7 19:30:31 2018
New Revision: 258339
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=258339&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR tree-optimization/84468 - bogus -Wstringop-truncation despite assignme
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84468
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
--- Comment #16 from Richard Biener
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84468
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |8.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84468
--- Comment #15 from Romain Geissler ---
Hi,
This latest patch seems to fix the occurences I have in my own code. Thanks ;)
Cheers,
Romain
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84468
--- Comment #14 from Martin Sebor ---
(In reply to Romain Geissler from comment #13)
Ah, right. It's not skipping over debug statements. That's easier to fix than
pr84561. This should do it:
Index: gcc/tree-ssa-strlen.c
=
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84468
--- Comment #13 from Romain Geissler ---
Hi,
It looks like that the code in #comment 11 works when you build just with -O2,
but not when you add debug symbols: -O2 -g. Do we have a way to ignore debug
statements when looking for the next stateme
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84468
--- Comment #12 from Martin Sebor ---
Yes, all the relevant tests pass with the patch. There is no warning for
either the test case in comment #0 or the one in comment #11. The change from
v1 of the patch is just the addition of test for null t
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84468
--- Comment #11 from Romain Geissler ---
Hi,
Indeed this version of the patch doesn't have any segv. However it seems that
it doesn't fix anymore the initial bug report. Does it actually passes the new
tests you introduced in your patch ?
Unles
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84468
--- Comment #10 from Martin Sebor ---
Thanks, I can reproduce it with that test case. Checking for the basic block
being null fixes the SEGV for me. Let me retest this and post an update for
review.
Index: gcc/tree-ssa-strlen.c
===
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84468
--- Comment #9 from Romain Geissler ---
Ok I was able to strip down the ICE to this very simple reproducer:
<
static char keyword[4];
static void f (void) { strncpy(keyword, "if ", 4); }
EOF
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84468
--- Comment #8 from Romain Geissler ---
I am currently testing a little variant of your patch (check that "nextbb" if
not NULL before trying to use it):
Index: gcc/tree-ssa-strlen.c
===
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84468
--- Comment #7 from Martin Sebor ---
Thanks for the early heads up! Can you please attach the translation unit for
the kernel file that GCC faults on?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84468
--- Comment #6 from Romain Geissler ---
Hi,
Tried to apply this patch on top of current trunk. During my build process, I
bootstrap a complete Linux/binutils/glibc/gcc toolchain following the Linux
From Scratch guidelines.
Without the patch, th
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84468
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||patch
Summary|[gcc 8] Inconsis
15 matches
Mail list logo
