From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: by sourceware.org (Postfix, from userid 48)
	id 8335F3858D39; Tue, 25 Apr 2023 07:46:09 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 8335F3858D39
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gcc.gnu.org;
	s=default; t=1682408769;
	bh=a1mPFIsiOgiREbmGFd3bgta5x6YFDUfYrBjSMaJY6WI=;
	h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From;
	b=S/t74CfvNWI7LRVc4OJ2nIghbXc/hjCrs4nO5iPBJflyeuHZub/Tzb/zNzi41+QwK
	 1A45VoZknKe3b5CtjgxkiDVt4jhhIIQ8rca2Zsp4VsIocCJsEAJtTlPj/qWS6mIi80
	 LEbcGmApvibrJqVbcfP6WINaq7u/trKBs8Qa8Rjk=
From: "david at westcontrol dot com" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug target/105523] Wrong warning array subscript [0] is outside
 array bounds
Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2023 07:46:09 +0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: target
X-Bugzilla-Version: 12.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: diagnostic
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: david at westcontrol dot com
X-Bugzilla-Status: NEW
X-Bugzilla-Resolution: 
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: ---
X-Bugzilla-Flags: 
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: 
Message-ID: <bug-105523-4-kf8jij4kaa@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-105523-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-105523-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
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
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.sourceware.org>

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D105523

--- Comment #23 from David Brown <david at westcontrol dot com> ---
(In reply to LIU Hao from comment #22)
> Yes, GCC should be told to shut up about dereferencing artificial address
> values.

One possibility is to have the warnings disabled whenever you are using a
volatile pointer.  After all, "volatile" is an indication that the compiler
doesn't know everything, and it has to trust the programmer.=