From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: by sourceware.org (Postfix, from userid 48) id B6E62385737B; Fri, 10 Jun 2022 20:24:48 +0000 (GMT) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org B6E62385737B From: "qinzhao at gcc dot gnu.org" To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug middle-end/101836] __builtin_object_size(P->M, 1) where M is an array and the last member of a struct fails Date: Fri, 10 Jun 2022 20:24:48 +0000 X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC X-Bugzilla-Type: changed X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc X-Bugzilla-Component: middle-end X-Bugzilla-Version: 12.0 X-Bugzilla-Keywords: X-Bugzilla-Severity: enhancement X-Bugzilla-Who: qinzhao at gcc dot gnu.org X-Bugzilla-Status: NEW X-Bugzilla-Resolution: X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3 X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: qinzhao at gcc dot gnu.org X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: --- X-Bugzilla-Flags: X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Bugzilla-URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/ Auto-Submitted: auto-generated MIME-Version: 1.0 X-BeenThere: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Gcc-bugs mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 10 Jun 2022 20:24:48 -0000 https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D101836 --- Comment #16 from qinzhao at gcc dot gnu.org --- additional work are needed in order to make this task complete: 1. add one more new gcc option: -fstrict-flex-arrays when it's on, only treat the following cases as flexing array: trailing array with size 0; trailing array with size 1; trailing flexible array; all other trailing arrays with size > 1 will be treated as normal arrays.=20 2. there a lot of places in GCC that currently assume all trailing arrays as flexible array, we might need to update all these places altogether to make= GCC behavior consistently.=20 As I checked, most of the places used an old routine array_at_struct_end_p,= we might need to replace all the usage of "array_at_struct_end_p" with the new option + the more strict checking on flexing trailing array.=20 let me know if you have any comments and suggestions.=