The difference in *.uninit before/after that commit is small, just:
@@ -78,7 +79,7 @@ fn4 (struct F * x, unsigned int k)
goto <bb 7>;
<bb 7>:
- # retval_25 = PHI <0(3), retval_26(6)>
+ # err_25 = PHI <0(3), retval_26(6)>
_12 = y_9->f;
if (_12 == 0)
goto <bb 9>;
@@ -89,17 +90,17 @@ fn4 (struct F * x, unsigned int k)
goto <bb 13>;
<bb 9>:
- if (retval_25 > 0)
+ if (err_25 > 0)
goto <bb 10>;
else
goto <bb 11>;
<bb 10>:
- retval_14 = fn0 ();
+ err_14 = fn0 ();
<bb 11>:
- # retval_2 = PHI <retval_25(9), retval_14(10)>
- if (retval_2 < 0)
+ # err_2 = PHI <err_25(9), err_14(10)>
+ if (err_2 < 0)
goto <bb 12>;
else
goto <bb 8>;
and in both cases there is
# retval_26 = PHI <retval_27(D)(4), retval_21(5)>
that is the reason for the warning. The important thing is that the retval
decl has TREE_NO_WARNING set (because of the retval = retval uninit warning
suppression), while err doesn't.
Trying a patch not to consider TREE_NO_WARNING SSA_NAME_VARs
ssa_undefined_value_p when inside of tree-ssa-uninit.c now.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1175744
Title:
[4.8 Regression] wrong -Wmaybe-uninitialized warning with -Os
To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/gcc/+bug/1175744/+subscriptions
--
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
