https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86318
--- Comment #4 from Josh Haberman ---
Is there any plan or timeline for fixing this bug?
: normal
Priority: P3
Component: tree-optimization
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: jhaberman at gmail dot com
Target Milestone: ---
In bugs https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58526 and
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60712
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56456
Bug 56456 depends on bug 108217, which changed state.
Bug 108217 Summary: bogus -Warray-bounds with pointer to constant local
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108217
What|Removed |Added
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108217
Josh Haberman changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|UNCONFIRMED
Component: middle-end
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: jhaberman at gmail dot com
Target Milestone: ---
Repro:
void ExternFunc1();
void ExternFunc2(const int*);
char mem[32];
static void StaticFunc(const int* i) {
void* ptr = (void*)0;
switch (*i) {
case
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70782
Josh Haberman changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|zero-initialized union |zero-initialized long
Severity: enhancement
Priority: P3
Component: rtl-optimization
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: jhaberman at gmail dot com
Target Milestone: ---
Test case:
--
#include
typedef union {
char ch;
float fl;
double dbl;
} u;
u f(const void
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52813
Josh Haberman jhaberman at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52813
--- Comment #4 from Josh Haberman jhaberman at gmail dot com 2012-04-01
19:23:14 UTC ---
I understand that GCC may not be able to save/restore %rsp like it does other
registers. But if that's the case, GCC should throw an error if the user puts
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52813
Bug #: 52813
Summary: %rsp in clobber list is silently ignored
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52055
--- Comment #2 from Josh Haberman jhaberman at gmail dot com 2012-01-31
17:23:51 UTC ---
Is there any requirement that you trap if the 64-bit read would have trapped?
Aren't unaligned reads undefined behavior that only happen to work on x86-64?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52055
Bug #: 52055
Summary: load of 64-bit pointer reads 64 bits even when only 32
are used
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44194
--- Comment #8 from Josh Haberman jhaberman at gmail dot com 2011-02-24
03:27:04 UTC ---
I found another test case for this. I thought I'd post it since it's extremely
different than the original one.
--
class Foo {
public:
virtual ~Foo
--- Comment #4 from jhaberman at gmail dot com 2010-07-10 01:38 ---
This seems to happen even with POD return types:
int foo();
void bar(int a);
void func() {
bar(foo());
}
In 32-bit mode it spills the return value to the stack for no reason. It also
seems to overallocate
--- Comment #7 from jhaberman at gmail dot com 2010-07-10 01:48 ---
I must have been on crack when I wrote that last comment. Sorry for the noise.
Though I do wonder how difficult the original bug is to fix. This seems to
make it more expensive to return structures by value
: 4.4.3
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: rtl-optimization
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: jhaberman at gmail dot com
GCC build triplet: x86_64-linux-gnu
GCC host triplet: x86_64-linux-gnu
16 matches
Mail list logo
