https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81162
Bill Schmidt changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81162
--- Comment #16 from Bill Schmidt ---
Author: wschmidt
Date: Tue Jul 25 19:44:10 2017
New Revision: 250544
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=250544=gcc=rev
Log:
[gcc]
2016-07-25 Bill Schmidt
Backport
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81162
--- Comment #15 from Bill Schmidt ---
Author: wschmidt
Date: Tue Jul 25 19:42:36 2017
New Revision: 250543
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=250543=gcc=rev
Log:
[gcc]
2016-07-25 Bill Schmidt
Backport
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81162
--- Comment #14 from Bill Schmidt ---
Author: wschmidt
Date: Tue Jul 25 19:40:50 2017
New Revision: 250542
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=250542=gcc=rev
Log:
[gcc]
2016-07-25 Bill Schmidt
Backport
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81162
--- Comment #13 from Bill Schmidt ---
Author: wschmidt
Date: Mon Jul 17 19:12:11 2017
New Revision: 250284
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=250284=gcc=rev
Log:
2017-07-17 Bill Schmidt
PR
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81162
--- Comment #12 from Bill Schmidt ---
Right, sorry about the ubsan dependency screwup. I'll move the test case later
today.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81162
--- Comment #11 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Mon, 17 Jul 2017, bernd.edlinger at hotmail dot de wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81162
>
> Bernd Edlinger changed:
>
>What|Removed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81162
Bernd Edlinger changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||bernd.edlinger at hotmail dot
de
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81162
Bill Schmidt changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||8.0
--- Comment #9 from Bill Schmidt
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81162
--- Comment #8 from Bill Schmidt ---
Author: wschmidt
Date: Fri Jul 14 18:06:45 2017
New Revision: 250212
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=250212=gcc=rev
Log:
[gcc]
2016-07-14 Bill Schmidt
PR
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81162
--- Comment #7 from Bill Schmidt ---
This case comes up when we're going to replace a NEGATE_EXPR with a PLUS_EXPR
or MINUS_EXPR. This is another case of an unprofitable replacement that should
be avoided anyway. So I think the following fix
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81162
Bill Schmidt changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |wschmidt at gcc dot
gnu.org
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81162
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|NEW
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81162
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81162
--- Comment #3 from Marek Polacek ---
And the difference is that with -fsanitize=integer-divide-by-zero we'll do
this:
5257 if (sanitize_flags_p ((SANITIZE_SHIFT
5258 | SANITIZE_DIVIDE | SANITIZE_FLOAT_DIVIDE))
5259
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81162
--- Comment #2 from Marek Polacek ---
-fsanitize=integer-divide-by-zero is what seems to trigger this.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81162
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
17 matches
Mail list logo