[Bug tree-optimization/90387] [9/10 Regression] __builtin_constant_p and -Warray-bounds warnings

2019-09-11 Thread rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90387 --- Comment #10 from Richard Biener --- Author: rguenth Date: Wed Sep 11 11:16:54 2019 New Revision: 275639 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=275639=gcc=rev Log: 2019-09-11 Richard Biener PR tree-optimization/90387 *

[Bug tree-optimization/90387] [9/10 Regression] __builtin_constant_p and -Warray-bounds warnings

2019-09-11 Thread rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90387 --- Comment #9 from Richard Biener --- So it's the following passes (if you ignore that with -fopenacc we already fold b_c_p during early opts): NEXT_PASS (pass_vrp, true /* warn_array_bounds_p */); NEXT_PASS (pass_dce);

[Bug tree-optimization/90387] [9/10 Regression] __builtin_constant_p and -Warray-bounds warnings

2019-09-11 Thread glisse at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90387 --- Comment #8 from Marc Glisse --- (In reply to Bernd Buschinski from comment #6) > From the comments I assumed that the fix is kind of trivial There is a simple change that gives the behavior you want on one example, but it is far from

[Bug tree-optimization/90387] [9/10 Regression] __builtin_constant_p and -Warray-bounds warnings

2019-09-11 Thread rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90387 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Assignee|unassigned