On Thu, 2021-01-21 at 16:46 -0700, Martin Sebor via Gcc-patches wrote:
Martin and I had a chat about this patch, but it's best to discuss code
on the mailing list rather than in a silo, so here goes...
> The initial patch I posted is missing initialization for a couple
> of locals. I'd noticed
* Jeff Law via Gcc-patches:
> I'd lean towards deferring to gcc12 stage1 given the libstdc++ hack is
> in place. That does mean that glibc will need to work around the
> instance they've stumbled over in ppc's rawmemchr.
We'll need to work around this in the glibc build, too. I'll check if
the
On 1/19/21 11:58 AM, Martin Sebor via Gcc-patches wrote:
> std::string tends to trigger a class of false positive out of bounds
> access warnings for code GCC cannot prove is unreachable because of
> missing aliasing constrains, and that ends up expanded inline into
> user code. Simply
Ping 3:
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2021-January/564060.html
I submitted this as a fix for a fair number of false positives
reported by Fedora package maintainers. Last week Jakub committed
r11-7146, which is an alternate workaround for the same problem,
but one isolated to
Ping 2:
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2021-January/564060.html
On 1/29/21 7:56 PM, Martin Sebor wrote:
Ping: https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2021-January/564060.html
On 1/21/21 4:46 PM, Martin Sebor wrote:
The initial patch I posted is missing initialization for a
Ping: https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2021-January/564060.html
On 1/21/21 4:46 PM, Martin Sebor wrote:
The initial patch I posted is missing initialization for a couple
of locals. I'd noticed it in testing but forgot to add the fix to
the patch before posting it. I have corrected
The initial patch I posted is missing initialization for a couple
of locals. I'd noticed it in testing but forgot to add the fix to
the patch before posting it. I have corrected that in the updated
revision and also added the test case from pr98512, and retested
the whole thing on x86_64-linux.
On 1/21/21 12:01 PM, Florian Weimer wrote:
* Martin Sebor:
On 1/21/21 10:34 AM, Florian Weimer wrote:
* Martin Sebor via Gcc-patches:
This patch depends on the fix for PR 98664 (already approved but
not yet checked in). I've tested it on x86_64-linux.
To avoid fallout I tried to keep the
* Martin Sebor:
> On 1/21/21 10:34 AM, Florian Weimer wrote:
>> * Martin Sebor via Gcc-patches:
>>
>>> This patch depends on the fix for PR 98664 (already approved but
>>> not yet checked in). I've tested it on x86_64-linux.
>>>
>>> To avoid fallout I tried to keep the changes to a minimum, and
On 1/21/21 10:34 AM, Florian Weimer wrote:
* Martin Sebor via Gcc-patches:
This patch depends on the fix for PR 98664 (already approved but
not yet checked in). I've tested it on x86_64-linux.
To avoid fallout I tried to keep the changes to a minimum, and
so the design isn't as robust as I'd
* Martin Sebor via Gcc-patches:
> This patch depends on the fix for PR 98664 (already approved but
> not yet checked in). I've tested it on x86_64-linux.
>
> To avoid fallout I tried to keep the changes to a minimum, and
> so the design isn't as robust as I'd like it ultimately to be.
> I plan
std::string tends to trigger a class of false positive out of bounds
access warnings for code GCC cannot prove is unreachable because of
missing aliasing constrains, and that ends up expanded inline into
user code. Simply inserting the contents of a constant char array
does that. In GCC 10
12 matches
Mail list logo
