FYI.
Committed this last patch as:
https://jira.oci.oraclecorp.com/browse/OLDIS-21095
I will come up with the update to gcc-13/changes.html for -fstrict-flex-arrays
very soon.
Thanks.
Qing
> On Dec 16, 2022, at 9:49 AM, Qing Zhao via Gcc-patches
> wrote:
>
>
>
>> On Dec 16, 2022, at 4:17
> On Dec 16, 2022, at 4:17 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
>
> On Thu, 15 Dec 2022, Qing Zhao wrote:
>
>>
>>
>>> On Dec 15, 2022, at 2:47 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
>>>
>>> On Wed, 14 Dec 2022, Qing Zhao wrote:
>>>
Hi, Richard,
I guess that we now agreed on the following:
On Thu, 15 Dec 2022, Qing Zhao wrote:
>
>
> > On Dec 15, 2022, at 2:47 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, 14 Dec 2022, Qing Zhao wrote:
> >
> >> Hi, Richard,
> >>
> >> I guess that we now agreed on the following:
> >>
> >> “ the information that we ran into a trailing array but
> On Dec 15, 2022, at 2:47 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
>
> On Wed, 14 Dec 2022, Qing Zhao wrote:
>
>> Hi, Richard,
>>
>> I guess that we now agreed on the following:
>>
>> “ the information that we ran into a trailing array but didn't consider
>> it a flex array because of
On Wed, 14 Dec 2022, Qing Zhao wrote:
> Hi, Richard,
>
> I guess that we now agreed on the following:
>
> “ the information that we ran into a trailing array but didn't consider
> it a flex array because of -fstrict-flex-arrays is always a useful
> information”
>
> The only thing we didn’t
Hi, Richard,
I guess that we now agreed on the following:
“ the information that we ran into a trailing array but didn't consider
it a flex array because of -fstrict-flex-arrays is always a useful information”
The only thing we didn’t decide is:
A. Amend such new information to -Warray-bounds
> On Dec 14, 2022, at 9:08 AM, Qing Zhao via Gcc-patches
> wrote:
>
>
>
>> On Dec 14, 2022, at 4:03 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, 13 Dec 2022, Qing Zhao wrote:
>>
>>> Richard,
>>>
>>> Do you have any decision on this one?
>>> Do we need this warning option For GCC?
>>
>>
> On Dec 14, 2022, at 4:03 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
>
> On Tue, 13 Dec 2022, Qing Zhao wrote:
>
>> Richard,
>>
>> Do you have any decision on this one?
>> Do we need this warning option For GCC?
>
> Looking at the testcases it seems that the diagnostic amends
> -Warray-bounds
On Tue, 13 Dec 2022, Qing Zhao wrote:
> Richard,
>
> Do you have any decision on this one?
> Do we need this warning option For GCC?
Looking at the testcases it seems that the diagnostic amends
-Warray-bounds diagnostics for trailing but not flexible arrays?
Wouldn't it be better to
Richard,
Do you have any decision on this one?
Do we need this warning option For GCC?
thanks.
Qing
> On Dec 6, 2022, at 11:18 AM, Qing Zhao wrote:
>
> '-Wstrict-flex-arrays'
> Warn about inproper usages of flexible array members according to
> the LEVEL of the 'strict_flex_array
'-Wstrict-flex-arrays'
Warn about inproper usages of flexible array members according to
the LEVEL of the 'strict_flex_array (LEVEL)' attribute attached to
the trailing array field of a structure if it's available,
otherwise according to the LEVEL of the option
On Tue, 22 Nov 2022, Kees Cook wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 22, 2022 at 03:02:04PM +, Qing Zhao wrote:
> >
> >
> > > On Nov 22, 2022, at 9:10 AM, Qing Zhao via Gcc-patches
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >> On Nov 22, 2022, at 3:16 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
> > >>
> > >> On Mon, 21 Nov
On Tue, Nov 22, 2022 at 03:02:04PM +, Qing Zhao wrote:
>
>
> > On Nov 22, 2022, at 9:10 AM, Qing Zhao via Gcc-patches
> > wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> >> On Nov 22, 2022, at 3:16 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
> >>
> >> On Mon, 21 Nov 2022, Qing Zhao wrote:
> >>
> >>>
> >>>
> On Nov 18,
> On Nov 22, 2022, at 9:10 AM, Qing Zhao via Gcc-patches
> wrote:
>
>
>
>> On Nov 22, 2022, at 3:16 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, 21 Nov 2022, Qing Zhao wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
On Nov 18, 2022, at 11:31 AM, Kees Cook wrote:
On Fri, Nov 18, 2022 at 03:19:07PM
> On Nov 22, 2022, at 3:16 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
>
> On Mon, 21 Nov 2022, Qing Zhao wrote:
>
>>
>>
>>> On Nov 18, 2022, at 11:31 AM, Kees Cook wrote:
>>>
>>> On Fri, Nov 18, 2022 at 03:19:07PM +, Qing Zhao wrote:
Hi, Richard,
Honestly, it?s very hard for me to
On Mon, 21 Nov 2022, Qing Zhao wrote:
>
>
> > On Nov 18, 2022, at 11:31 AM, Kees Cook wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, Nov 18, 2022 at 03:19:07PM +, Qing Zhao wrote:
> >> Hi, Richard,
> >>
> >> Honestly, it?s very hard for me to decide what?s the best way to handle
> >> the interaction
> >>
> On Nov 18, 2022, at 11:31 AM, Kees Cook wrote:
>
> On Fri, Nov 18, 2022 at 03:19:07PM +, Qing Zhao wrote:
>> Hi, Richard,
>>
>> Honestly, it’s very hard for me to decide what’s the best way to handle the
>> interaction
>> between -fstrict-flex-array=M and -Warray-bounds=N.
>>
>>
On Fri, Nov 18, 2022 at 03:19:07PM +, Qing Zhao wrote:
> Hi, Richard,
>
> Honestly, it’s very hard for me to decide what’s the best way to handle the
> interaction
> between -fstrict-flex-array=M and -Warray-bounds=N.
>
> Ideally, -fstrict-flex-array=M should completely control the
Hi, Richard,
Honestly, it’s very hard for me to decide what’s the best way to handle the
interaction
between -fstrict-flex-array=M and -Warray-bounds=N.
Ideally, -fstrict-flex-array=M should completely control the behavior of
-Warray-bounds.
If possible, I prefer this solution.
However,
On Tue, 8 Nov 2022, Qing Zhao wrote:
> '-Wstrict-flex-arrays'
> Warn about inproper usages of flexible array members according to
> the LEVEL of the 'strict_flex_array (LEVEL)' attribute attached to
> the trailing array field of a structure if it's available,
> otherwise
Ping on this patch.
thanks.
Qing
> On Nov 8, 2022, at 9:51 AM, Qing Zhao wrote:
>
> '-Wstrict-flex-arrays'
> Warn about inproper usages of flexible array members according to
> the LEVEL of the 'strict_flex_array (LEVEL)' attribute attached to
> the trailing array field of a
'-Wstrict-flex-arrays'
Warn about inproper usages of flexible array members according to
the LEVEL of the 'strict_flex_array (LEVEL)' attribute attached to
the trailing array field of a structure if it's available,
otherwise according to the LEVEL of the option
22 matches
Mail list logo
