...
diff --git gcc/testsuite/c-c++-common/pr60226.c
gcc/testsuite/c-c++-common/pr60226.c
...
The test fails on x86_64-apple-darwin13 with
FAIL: c-c++-common/pr60226.c -std=gnu++98 (test for excess errors)
Excess errors:
/opt/gcc/work/gcc/testsuite/c-c++-common/pr60226.c:6:7: error:
On Jul 8, 2014, at 3:12 PM, Dominique Dhumieres domi...@lps.ens.fr wrote:
diff --git gcc/testsuite/c-c++-common/pr60226.c
gcc/testsuite/c-c++-common/pr60226.c
The test fails on x86_64-apple-darwin13 with
FAIL: c-c++-common/pr60226.c -std=gnu++98 (test for excess errors)
Excess errors:
On 07/03/14 04:18, Marek Polacek wrote:
On Mon, Jun 30, 2014 at 03:40:18PM -0700, Mike Stump wrote:
I glanced at it:
(gdb) p/x TYPE_ALIGN (type)
$1 = 2147483648
(gdb) p/x TYPE_ALIGN (type)
$2 = 0x8000
The callee is int, the caller uses unsigned int. The assert I see is because
the
On Mon, Jun 30, 2014 at 01:50:12PM -0600, Jeff Law wrote:
On 03/04/14 09:40, Marek Polacek wrote:
This should fix ICE on insane alignment. Normally, check_user_alignment
detects e.g. alignment 1 32, but not 1 28. However, record_align
is in bits, so it's actually 8 * (1 28) and that's
On Mon, Jun 30, 2014 at 03:40:18PM -0700, Mike Stump wrote:
I glanced at it:
(gdb) p/x TYPE_ALIGN (type)
$1 = 2147483648
(gdb) p/x TYPE_ALIGN (type)
$2 = 0x8000
The callee is int, the caller uses unsigned int. The assert I see is because
the routines are not type correct:
=
On 03/04/14 09:40, Marek Polacek wrote:
This should fix ICE on insane alignment. Normally, check_user_alignment
detects e.g. alignment 1 32, but not 1 28. However, record_align
is in bits, so it's actually 8 * (1 28) and that's greater than
INT_MAX. This patch rejects such code.
In the
On Jun 30, 2014, at 12:50 PM, Jeff Law l...@redhat.com wrote:
On 03/04/14 09:40, Marek Polacek wrote:
This should fix ICE on insane alignment. Normally, check_user_alignment
detects e.g. alignment 1 32, but not 1 28. However, record_align
is in bits, so it's actually 8 * (1 28) and that's
On Jun 30, 2014, at 3:40 PM, Mike Stump mikest...@comcast.net wrote:
Is this still applicable after the wide-int changes? I haven't looked
closely.
Oops, forgot to state what I wanted to state… Yes, it still aborts post
wide-int…
Ping.
On Tue, Mar 04, 2014 at 05:40:29PM +0100, Marek Polacek wrote:
This should fix ICE on insane alignment. Normally, check_user_alignment
detects e.g. alignment 1 32, but not 1 28. However, record_align
is in bits, so it's actually 8 * (1 28) and that's greater than
INT_MAX. This
This should fix ICE on insane alignment. Normally, check_user_alignment
detects e.g. alignment 1 32, but not 1 28. However, record_align
is in bits, so it's actually 8 * (1 28) and that's greater than
INT_MAX. This patch rejects such code.
In the middle hunk, we should give up when an error
10 matches
Mail list logo