From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 18409 invoked by alias); 25 Jul 2010 00:04:26 -0000 Received: (qmail 18338 invoked by uid 48); 25 Jul 2010 00:04:10 -0000 Date: Sun, 25 Jul 2010 00:04:00 -0000 Message-ID: <20100725000410.18337.qmail@sourceware.org> X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC References: Subject: [Bug middle-end/37060] [4.3/4.4/4.5/4.6 regression] Bogus __builtin___memcpy_chk overflow warning In-Reply-To: Reply-To: gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org From: "pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org" Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org X-SW-Source: 2010-07/txt/msg02737.txt.bz2 ------- Comment #11 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-25 00:04 ------- I think this testcase has some other issues at least on the trunk. sparc_floating_p.isra.0 is produced for 32bit but not 64bit. And then we have: MEM[(const struct type *)type_1(D)].code; Why didn't we just produce an indirect reference here as the const should be able to be ignored? (CCing Richard about that part). -- pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot | |org http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37060