https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67513
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|9.5 |---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67513
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|9.4 |9.5
--- Comment #19 from Richard
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67513
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|9.3 |9.4
--- Comment #18 from Jakub Jelinek
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67513
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|9.2 |9.3
--- Comment #17 from Jakub Jelinek
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67513
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|9.0 |9.2
--- Comment #16 from Jakub Jelinek
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67513
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|NEW
Assignee|marxin at gcc dot
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67513
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67513
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||missed-optimization
Target
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67513
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|6.4 |6.5
--- Comment #13 from Richard
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67513
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|6.3 |6.4
--- Comment #12 from Jakub Jelinek
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67513
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|6.2 |6.3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67513
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|6.2 |6.3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67513
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|6.2 |6.3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67513
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|6.2 |6.3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67513
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|6.0 |6.2
--- Comment #11 from Jakub Jelinek
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67513
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|NEW
Assignee|mpolacek at gcc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67513
--- Comment #7 from Yury Gribov ---
FYI I'd prefer to keep current BIT_IOR_EXPR approach in asan_expand_check_ifn
as it allows for efficient implementation for ARM targets (as compared to two
successive branches currently used in LLVM).
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67513
--- Comment #8 from Marek Polacek ---
(In reply to Yury Gribov from comment #7)
> FYI I'd prefer to keep current BIT_IOR_EXPR approach in
> asan_expand_check_ifn as it allows for efficient implementation for ARM
> targets (as compared to two
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67513
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||law at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #9
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67513
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67513
--- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Note, the asan pass emits the checks in the order of first testing for non-zero
and then doing the sub-quadword comparison (if any), but uses bitwise and in
between the two conditions and the choice to
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67513
--- Comment #4 from Andrey Ryabinin ---
(In reply to Andrey Ryabinin from comment #3)
> (In reply to Yury Gribov from comment #1)
> > (In reply to Andrey Ryabinin from comment #0)
> > > (shadow value is usually zero).
> >
> > What makes you
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67513
--- Comment #3 from Andrey Ryabinin ---
(In reply to Yury Gribov from comment #1)
> (In reply to Andrey Ryabinin from comment #0)
> > (shadow value is usually zero).
>
> What makes you think so? AFAIU for less-than-8-byte scalars it's always
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67513
--- Comment #5 from Kostya Serebryany ---
(In reply to Yury Gribov from comment #1)
> (In reply to Andrey Ryabinin from comment #0)
> > (shadow value is usually zero).
>
> What makes you think so? AFAIU for less-than-8-byte scalars it's always
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67513
--- Comment #1 from Yury Gribov ---
(In reply to Andrey Ryabinin from comment #0)
> (shadow value is usually zero).
What makes you think so? AFAIU for less-than-8-byte scalars it's always
non-zero. I vaguely remember than Kostya did something
25 matches
Mail list logo
