https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84184
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84184
--- Comment #6 from Eric Botcazou ---
> Could gcc generate warning without much of additional effort (or even better
> an error) when it knows it is about to generate broken code?
Generating broken code from invalid C is perfectly OK, but we cou
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84184
--- Comment #5 from Sergei Trofimovich ---
Good suggestion! I will do it.
Could gcc generate warning without much of additional effort (or even better an
error) when it knows it is about to generate broken code?
For this code I guess the patter
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84184
--- Comment #4 from Eric Botcazou ---
I'd suggest fixing the code instead:
extern struct s glo_s_middle_hidden[] __attribute__((visibility("hidden")));
which makes it valid C and generates correct code.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84184
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84184
--- Comment #2 from Sergei Trofimovich ---
> - large amount of code
Jason pointed out the blowup happens due to byte-level reads (caused by 'char*'
-> 'u64*' required alignment increase) thus it's expected. Only correctness
issue is left.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84184
Sergei Trofimovich changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Co
