https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84919
--- Comment #4 from H.J. Lu <hjl.tools at gmail dot com> --- (In reply to Jeffrey A. Law from comment #3) > Umm, isn't that invalid code? The whole point of the warning is to catch > precisely this kind of broken idiom. Right? Why is it invalid? Argument 4 is for %p. It looks valid to me.