public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "amacleod at redhat dot com" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org> To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug tree-optimization/104475] [12 Regression] Wstringop-overflow + atomics incorrect warning on dynamic object Date: Thu, 03 Mar 2022 17:55:44 +0000 [thread overview] Message-ID: <bug-104475-4-S5jU7PJlS8@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 #5 from Andrew Macleod <amacleod at redhat dot com> --- We do have the option of not trying to determine anything about _1 in situations like this.. I tried removing the op1_range() routine for addr_expr, and we pass all tests just fine. we would pick up non-null, if relevant, during normal processing. It may not be necessary to try to determine things like this during the outgoing edge calculation.. especially if its causing issues...
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-03-03 17:55 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 [this message] 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 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-S5jU7PJlS8@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).