public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org> To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug tree-optimization/104475] [12/13 Regression] Wstringop-overflow + atomics incorrect warning on dynamic object Date: Tue, 06 Dec 2022 10:26:29 +0000 [thread overview] Message-ID: <bug-104475-4-PsUAMWQGBn@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> (raw) In-Reply-To: <bug-104475-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104475 --- Comment #18 from Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> --- The change improved the wording of the diagnostic by appending the note indicating an object at zero address. It didn't mitigate the diagnostic which as far as I analyzed is technically correct (but not very helpful). An improvement for these diagnostics would be analyzer-style reporting of the guarding conditions. Another possible improvement would be to somehow keep a pointer to the symbolic base we equality-propagated from the conditional so that we, for if (!d) if (enabled) *d = 0; can say the object pointed-to by 'd' when 'd' is nullptr is accessed here. The IL currently just has a pointer constant and doesn't know that was originally derived from 'd'.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-12-06 10:26 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 30+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top 2022-02-09 19:37 [Bug c++/104475] New: " thiago at kde dot org 2022-02-09 20:14 ` [Bug tree-optimization/104475] [12 Regression] " pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org 2022-02-09 23:48 ` msebor at gcc dot gnu.org 2022-02-16 14:56 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2022-03-03 14:00 ` aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org 2022-03-03 16:09 ` amacleod at redhat dot com 2022-03-03 17:55 ` amacleod at redhat dot com 2022-03-04 14:47 ` amacleod at redhat dot com 2022-03-09 13:13 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2022-03-12 9:39 ` aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org 2022-03-23 12:47 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2022-03-23 17:23 ` aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org 2022-05-06 8:32 ` [Bug tree-optimization/104475] [12/13 " jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2022-07-26 12:59 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2022-12-05 15:50 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2022-12-05 16:36 ` thiago at kde dot org 2022-12-06 8:17 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2022-12-06 9:11 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2022-12-06 10:22 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org 2022-12-06 10:26 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org [this message] 2022-12-06 18:03 ` thiago at kde dot org 2022-12-07 9:46 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2022-12-07 9:48 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2022-12-07 9:49 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2022-12-07 9:54 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2022-12-07 11:25 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2023-01-17 17:37 ` jason at gcc dot gnu.org 2023-05-08 12:23 ` [Bug tree-optimization/104475] [12/13/14 " rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2023-09-18 9:19 ` aph at gcc dot gnu.org 2023-09-18 10:04 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
Reply instructions: You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email using any one of the following methods: * Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client, and reply-to-all from there: mbox Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style * Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to switches of git-send-email(1): git send-email \ --in-reply-to=bug-104475-4-PsUAMWQGBn@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/ \ --to=gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org \ --cc=gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org \ /path/to/YOUR_REPLY https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html * If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header via mailto: links, try the mailto: linkBe sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox; as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).