public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "jay+ggcc@jp-hosting.net" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug c++/105593] avx512 math function raises uninitialized variable warning
Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2023 11:30:43 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <bug-105593-4-RYSaozKieE@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <bug-105593-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105593
--- Comment #21 from James Addison <jay+ggcc@jp-hosting.net> ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #20)
> (In reply to James Addison from comment #19)
> > Would adding '-Wuninitialized -Werror=uninitialized' to the dg-options in
> > 'gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/i386/avx-1.c' be possible, with these fixes in
> > place? (as a regression safety net of sorts)
>
> I don't see what advantages it would have over -Wuninitialized on sse-23.c.
> And, -Werror= isn't really needed, the testing infrastructure will mark as
> FAILs any
> excess diagnostics which isn't expected or pruned out, not just errors.
Ok, that makes sense - thanks for the explanations.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-01-31 11:30 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 34+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-05-13 14:35 [Bug other/105593] New: " rogerio.souza at gmail dot com
2022-05-13 14:42 ` [Bug target/105593] " pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-05-13 14:43 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-05-13 16:58 ` rogerio.souza at gmail dot com
2022-05-13 17:04 ` rogerio.souza at gmail dot com
2022-05-16 7:16 ` [Bug c++/105593] [12/13 Regression] " rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-06-01 19:36 ` [Bug c++/105593] " jason at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-06-02 6:41 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-06-23 16:18 ` rogerio.souza at gmail dot com
2022-11-22 19:14 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-01-12 8:09 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-01-12 11:44 ` jay+ggcc@jp-hosting.net
2023-01-12 14:03 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-01-12 14:26 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-01-12 15:10 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-01-16 8:41 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-01-16 8:42 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-01-16 9:04 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-01-29 15:15 ` jay+ggcc@jp-hosting.net
2023-01-30 17:46 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-01-31 8:21 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-01-31 10:53 ` jay+ggcc@jp-hosting.net
2023-01-31 11:23 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-01-31 11:30 ` jay+ggcc@jp-hosting.net [this message]
2023-02-10 13:21 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-02-10 15:02 ` mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-02-10 15:13 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-02-10 15:15 ` mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-02-10 15:16 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-02-10 15:18 ` mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-02-10 15:22 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-02-10 17:47 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-02-10 17:47 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-02-10 17:47 ` cvs-commit 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-105593-4-RYSaozKieE@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: link
Be 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).