https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110273
--- Comment #13 from Zeb Figura ---
(In reply to Sam James from comment #11)
> (In reply to Jens-Hanno Schwalm from comment #10)
> > Hi, i think we found a very-similar issue in darktable code, you might look
> > at
> >
> >
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=07
--- Comment #17 from Zeb Figura ---
Actually, for that matter, what is the intended purpose of -mstackrealign? How
is it supposed to differ from -mincoming-stack-boundary and
-mpreferred-stack-boundary? The documentation is kind of unclear; it
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=07
--- Comment #15 from Zeb Figura ---
(In reply to Eric Botcazou from comment #14)
> > I'd say that
> >
> > config/i386/cygming.h:#define STACK_REALIGN_DEFAULT TARGET_SSE
> >
> > is a non-working "fix". The appropriate default would be
> >
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111722
--- Comment #5 from Zeb Figura ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #4)
> There is no bug here.
> ICF finds that your definition of memcpy is the same as memmove and merges
> the 2 and then calls memcpy from your memmove and then inlines
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111722
--- Comment #3 from Zeb Figura ---
Created attachment 56072
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=56072=edit
testcase
Attaching a reduced-ish testcase, that contains the unmodified code of memcpy()
and memmove(), plus two
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111722
Zeb Figura changed:
What|Removed |Added
Version|unknown |13.2.0
Keywords|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111722
Bug ID: 111722
Summary: gcc generates wrong code with
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111669
--- Comment #6 from Zeb Figura ---
It is my impression that gcc is interested in avoiding false positives for its
warnings. This isn't to say that there aren't some number of false positives in
existence, but it is my impression that gcc is
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111669
--- Comment #3 from Zeb Figura ---
(In reply to Xi Ruoyao from comment #2)
> (In reply to Xi Ruoyao from comment #1)
> > The warning given for the reduced test case is correct because it does not
> > make sense. It should be just rewritten as
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111669
Bug ID: 111669
Summary: bogus -Wnonnull in conditionally executed code
Product: gcc
Version: 13.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: diagnostic
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=07
--- Comment #6 from Zebediah Figura ---
(In reply to Zebediah Figura from comment #4)
> (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #3)
> > https://inbox.sourceware.org/gcc-patches/5969976.Bvae8NF9fS@polaris/
>
> Again, I'm not sure what you're
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=07
--- Comment #4 from Zebediah Figura ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #3)
> https://inbox.sourceware.org/gcc-patches/5969976.Bvae8NF9fS@polaris/
Again, I'm not sure what you're trying to communicate here. I'm aware that
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=07
--- Comment #2 from Zebediah Figura ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #1)
> This on purpose, it is only callbacks (from libc) and main that needs the
> realignment here.
I don't understand what you mean? It's not just libc and main
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=07
Bug ID: 07
Summary: i686-w64-mingw32 does not realign stack when
__attribute__((aligned)) or
__attribute__((vector_size)) are used
Product: gcc
Version:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110260
--- Comment #11 from Zebediah Figura ---
(In reply to Alexander Monakov from comment #10)
> Right, those are different issues. Any chance of a standalone testcase
> extracted from Wine? If you already see a function where stack realignment
> is
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110273
--- Comment #1 from Zebediah Figura ---
Created attachment 55335
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=55335=edit
gcc -v output, from godbolt
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110273
Bug ID: 110273
Summary: i686-w64-mingw32 with -march=znver4 generates AVX
instructions without stack alignment
Product: gcc
Version: 13.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110260
Zebediah Figura changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||zfigura at codeweavers dot com
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106904
--- Comment #8 from Zebediah Figura ---
Thanks!
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106904
--- Comment #3 from Zebediah Figura ---
>From the warning, it seems like it thinks I wrote
memcpy(>wp.hwnd, , sizeof(wp));
but that's not what I wrote.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106904
--- Comment #2 from Zebediah Figura ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #1)
> The warning is correct for the reduced testcase as we warning that you are
> copying the wrong size for the field
The field ">wp" is of size 16 (4 ints),
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106904
Bug ID: 106904
Summary: Incorrect -Wstringop-overflow with partial memcpy()
into a nested structure
Product: gcc
Version: 12.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96367
--- Comment #4 from Zebediah Figura ---
Forgot to mention:
leslie@terabithia:~/git/wine32$ gcc --version
gcc (Debian 12.2.0-1) 12.2.0
Copyright (C) 2022 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
This is free software; see the source for copying
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96367
Zebediah Figura changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||zfigura at codeweavers dot com
---
24 matches
Mail list logo
