public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* [Bug other/106120] New: [13 regression] g++.dg/warn/Wstringop-overflow-4.C fails since r13-1268-g8c99e307b20c50
@ 2022-06-28 16:01 seurer at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-06-28 17:25 ` [Bug other/106120] " aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org
` (15 more replies)
0 siblings, 16 replies; 17+ messages in thread
From: seurer at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2022-06-28 16:01 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106120
Bug ID: 106120
Summary: [13 regression] g++.dg/warn/Wstringop-overflow-4.C
fails since r13-1268-g8c99e307b20c50
Product: gcc
Version: 13.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: other
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: seurer at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
g:8c99e307b20c502e55c425897fb3884ba8f05882, r13-1268-g8c99e307b20c50
make -k check-gcc RUNTESTFLAGS="--target_board=unix'{-m32}'
dg.exp=g++.dg/warn/Wstringop-overflow-4.C"
FAIL: g++.dg/warn/Wstringop-overflow-4.C -std=gnu++98 (test for excess errors)
# of expected passes 59
# of unexpected failures 1
This is for 32 bits on a powerpc64 BE system.
Excess errors:
/home/seurer/gcc/git/gcc-trunk/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/warn/Wstringop-overflow-4.C:144:3:
warning: 'void* __builtin_memcpy(void*, const void*, unsigned int)' writing 3
bytes into a region of size 0 [-Wstringop-overflow=]
commit 8c99e307b20c502e55c425897fb3884ba8f05882
Author: Aldy Hernandez <aldyh@redhat.com>
Date: Sat Jun 25 18:58:02 2022 -0400
Convert DOM to use Ranger rather than EVRP
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 17+ messages in thread
* [Bug other/106120] [13 regression] g++.dg/warn/Wstringop-overflow-4.C fails since r13-1268-g8c99e307b20c50
2022-06-28 16:01 [Bug other/106120] New: [13 regression] g++.dg/warn/Wstringop-overflow-4.C fails since r13-1268-g8c99e307b20c50 seurer at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2022-06-28 17:25 ` aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-06-28 18:14 ` seurer at gcc dot gnu.org
` (14 subsequent siblings)
15 siblings, 0 replies; 17+ messages in thread
From: aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2022-06-28 17:25 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106120
--- Comment #1 from Aldy Hernandez <aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
I wonder if this is the same problem we see on x86-64 on line 198.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 17+ messages in thread
* [Bug other/106120] [13 regression] g++.dg/warn/Wstringop-overflow-4.C fails since r13-1268-g8c99e307b20c50
2022-06-28 16:01 [Bug other/106120] New: [13 regression] g++.dg/warn/Wstringop-overflow-4.C fails since r13-1268-g8c99e307b20c50 seurer at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-06-28 17:25 ` [Bug other/106120] " aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2022-06-28 18:14 ` seurer at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-06-29 0:03 ` hp at gcc dot gnu.org
` (13 subsequent siblings)
15 siblings, 0 replies; 17+ messages in thread
From: seurer at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2022-06-28 18:14 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106120
--- Comment #2 from seurer at gcc dot gnu.org ---
I am not sure. This only happens for 32 bit runs on power. 64 bit ones work
fine.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 17+ messages in thread
* [Bug other/106120] [13 regression] g++.dg/warn/Wstringop-overflow-4.C fails since r13-1268-g8c99e307b20c50
2022-06-28 16:01 [Bug other/106120] New: [13 regression] g++.dg/warn/Wstringop-overflow-4.C fails since r13-1268-g8c99e307b20c50 seurer at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-06-28 17:25 ` [Bug other/106120] " aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-06-28 18:14 ` seurer at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2022-06-29 0:03 ` hp at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-06-29 9:44 ` [Bug testsuite/106120] " rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
` (12 subsequent siblings)
15 siblings, 0 replies; 17+ messages in thread
From: hp at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2022-06-29 0:03 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106120
Hans-Peter Nilsson <hp at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |hp at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #3 from Hans-Peter Nilsson <hp at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to seurer from comment #2)
> I am not sure. This only happens for 32 bit runs on power. 64 bit ones
> work fine.
You mean something like -m32 with powerpc64-linux-gnu?
I'll dump my observations for cris-elf (a "32-bit target") hoping it'll help:
At r13-1268-g8c99e307b20c50:
Running TOPLEVEL/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/dg.exp ...
...
FAIL: g++.dg/warn/Wstringop-overflow-4.C -std=gnu++98 (test for excess errors)
...
At r13-1333-g74956337e827, (long) after r13-1271-g80ace9185dc534
aldyh@redhat.com "XFAIL a test in g++.dg/warn/Wstringop-overflow-4.C":
Running TOPLEVEL/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/dg.exp ...
FAIL: g++.dg/warn/Wstringop-overflow-4.C -std=gnu++98 (test for excess errors)
XPASS: g++.dg/warn/Wstringop-overflow-4.C -std=gnu++14 (test for bogus
messages, line 198)
XPASS: g++.dg/warn/Wstringop-overflow-4.C -std=gnu++17 (test for bogus
messages, line 198)
XPASS: g++.dg/warn/Wstringop-overflow-4.C -std=gnu++20 (test for bogus
messages, line 198)
g++.log at that latter commit:
FAIL: g++.dg/warn/Wstringop-overflow-4.C -std=gnu++98 (test for excess errors)
Excess errors:
TOPLEVEL/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/warn/Wstringop-overflow-4.C:144:3: warning:
'void* __builtin_memcpy(void*, const void*, long unsigned int)' writing 3 bytes
into a region of size 0 [-Wstringop-overflow=]
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 17+ messages in thread
* [Bug testsuite/106120] [13 regression] g++.dg/warn/Wstringop-overflow-4.C fails since r13-1268-g8c99e307b20c50
2022-06-28 16:01 [Bug other/106120] New: [13 regression] g++.dg/warn/Wstringop-overflow-4.C fails since r13-1268-g8c99e307b20c50 seurer at gcc dot gnu.org
` (2 preceding siblings ...)
2022-06-29 0:03 ` hp at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2022-06-29 9:44 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-07-08 23:10 ` hp at gcc dot gnu.org
` (11 subsequent siblings)
15 siblings, 0 replies; 17+ messages in thread
From: rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2022-06-29 9:44 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106120
Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Component|other |testsuite
Target Milestone|--- |13.0
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 17+ messages in thread
* [Bug testsuite/106120] [13 regression] g++.dg/warn/Wstringop-overflow-4.C fails since r13-1268-g8c99e307b20c50
2022-06-28 16:01 [Bug other/106120] New: [13 regression] g++.dg/warn/Wstringop-overflow-4.C fails since r13-1268-g8c99e307b20c50 seurer at gcc dot gnu.org
` (3 preceding siblings ...)
2022-06-29 9:44 ` [Bug testsuite/106120] " rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2022-07-08 23:10 ` hp at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-07-09 6:29 ` aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org
` (10 subsequent siblings)
15 siblings, 0 replies; 17+ messages in thread
From: hp at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2022-07-08 23:10 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106120
--- Comment #4 from Hans-Peter Nilsson <hp at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
The XPASS:es seem to be the same for everyone, with the FAIL only appearing on
ILP32.
Aldy, how about correcting those xfail markers and adding one for ILP32?
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 17+ messages in thread
* [Bug testsuite/106120] [13 regression] g++.dg/warn/Wstringop-overflow-4.C fails since r13-1268-g8c99e307b20c50
2022-06-28 16:01 [Bug other/106120] New: [13 regression] g++.dg/warn/Wstringop-overflow-4.C fails since r13-1268-g8c99e307b20c50 seurer at gcc dot gnu.org
` (4 preceding siblings ...)
2022-07-08 23:10 ` hp at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2022-07-09 6:29 ` aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-12-14 15:50 ` danglin at gcc dot gnu.org
` (9 subsequent siblings)
15 siblings, 0 replies; 17+ messages in thread
From: aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2022-07-09 6:29 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106120
--- Comment #5 from Aldy Hernandez <aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to Hans-Peter Nilsson from comment #4)
> The XPASS:es seem to be the same for everyone, with the FAIL only appearing
> on ILP32.
>
> Aldy, how about correcting those xfail markers and adding one for ILP32?
Sounds fine to me. I won't be able to get to it until next week, so if you
want to whip up a patch and CC me, I'd be glad to approve it.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 17+ messages in thread
* [Bug testsuite/106120] [13 regression] g++.dg/warn/Wstringop-overflow-4.C fails since r13-1268-g8c99e307b20c50
2022-06-28 16:01 [Bug other/106120] New: [13 regression] g++.dg/warn/Wstringop-overflow-4.C fails since r13-1268-g8c99e307b20c50 seurer at gcc dot gnu.org
` (5 preceding siblings ...)
2022-07-09 6:29 ` aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2022-12-14 15:50 ` danglin at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-12-20 14:05 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
` (8 subsequent siblings)
15 siblings, 0 replies; 17+ messages in thread
From: danglin at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2022-12-14 15:50 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106120
John David Anglin <danglin at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Last reconfirmed| |2022-12-14
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Target|powerpc64-linux-gnu |powerpc64-linux-gnu
| |hppa-unknown-linux-gnu
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
CC| |danglin at gcc dot gnu.org
Host|powerpc64-linux-gnu |powerpc64-linux-gnu
| |hppa-unknown-linux-gnu
Build|powerpc64-linux-gnu |powerpc64-linux-gnu
| |hppa-unknown-linux-gnu
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 17+ messages in thread
* [Bug testsuite/106120] [13 regression] g++.dg/warn/Wstringop-overflow-4.C fails since r13-1268-g8c99e307b20c50
2022-06-28 16:01 [Bug other/106120] New: [13 regression] g++.dg/warn/Wstringop-overflow-4.C fails since r13-1268-g8c99e307b20c50 seurer at gcc dot gnu.org
` (6 preceding siblings ...)
2022-12-14 15:50 ` danglin at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2022-12-20 14:05 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-02-10 0:41 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org
` (7 subsequent siblings)
15 siblings, 0 replies; 17+ messages in thread
From: rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2022-12-20 14:05 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106120
Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Priority|P3 |P1
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 17+ messages in thread
* [Bug testsuite/106120] [13 regression] g++.dg/warn/Wstringop-overflow-4.C fails since r13-1268-g8c99e307b20c50
2022-06-28 16:01 [Bug other/106120] New: [13 regression] g++.dg/warn/Wstringop-overflow-4.C fails since r13-1268-g8c99e307b20c50 seurer at gcc dot gnu.org
` (7 preceding siblings ...)
2022-12-20 14:05 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2023-02-10 0:41 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-02-10 18:34 ` hp at gcc dot gnu.org
` (6 subsequent siblings)
15 siblings, 0 replies; 17+ messages in thread
From: cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2023-02-10 0:41 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106120
--- Comment #6 from CVS Commits <cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
The master branch has been updated by Hans-Peter Nilsson <hp@gcc.gnu.org>:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:c47f76c16bf7b3108e762d4b8b16fbb0c9c75187
commit r13-5765-gc47f76c16bf7b3108e762d4b8b16fbb0c9c75187
Author: Hans-Peter Nilsson <hp@axis.com>
Date: Tue Feb 7 17:28:50 2023 +0100
testsuite: XFAIL bogus g++.dg/warn/Wstringop-overflow-4.C:144, PR106120
There was a commit r13-2082-gbf13a13c65bd06 "c++: remove some xfails"
(not referencing the PR) that dealt with part of the PR, but didn't
xfail the ilp32-specific (bogus) warning mentioned in the PR.
PR testsuite/106120
* g++.dg/warn/Wstringop-overflow-4.C:144 XFAIL bogus warning for
ilp32 targets with c++98.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 17+ messages in thread
* [Bug testsuite/106120] [13 regression] g++.dg/warn/Wstringop-overflow-4.C fails since r13-1268-g8c99e307b20c50
2022-06-28 16:01 [Bug other/106120] New: [13 regression] g++.dg/warn/Wstringop-overflow-4.C fails since r13-1268-g8c99e307b20c50 seurer at gcc dot gnu.org
` (8 preceding siblings ...)
2023-02-10 0:41 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2023-02-10 18:34 ` hp at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-02-10 18:37 ` seurer at gcc dot gnu.org
` (5 subsequent siblings)
15 siblings, 0 replies; 17+ messages in thread
From: hp at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2023-02-10 18:34 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106120
--- Comment #7 from Hans-Peter Nilsson <hp at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Can the reporter please affirm that the issue is now solved (ppc64 m32 BE)?
It is for cris-elf, but it wouldn't be right closing someone elses bug-report.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 17+ messages in thread
* [Bug testsuite/106120] [13 regression] g++.dg/warn/Wstringop-overflow-4.C fails since r13-1268-g8c99e307b20c50
2022-06-28 16:01 [Bug other/106120] New: [13 regression] g++.dg/warn/Wstringop-overflow-4.C fails since r13-1268-g8c99e307b20c50 seurer at gcc dot gnu.org
` (9 preceding siblings ...)
2023-02-10 18:34 ` hp at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2023-02-10 18:37 ` seurer at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-02-10 22:52 ` hp at gcc dot gnu.org
` (4 subsequent siblings)
15 siblings, 0 replies; 17+ messages in thread
From: seurer at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2023-02-10 18:37 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106120
--- Comment #8 from seurer at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Yes, in the test run I just did it worked.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 17+ messages in thread
* [Bug testsuite/106120] [13 regression] g++.dg/warn/Wstringop-overflow-4.C fails since r13-1268-g8c99e307b20c50
2022-06-28 16:01 [Bug other/106120] New: [13 regression] g++.dg/warn/Wstringop-overflow-4.C fails since r13-1268-g8c99e307b20c50 seurer at gcc dot gnu.org
` (10 preceding siblings ...)
2023-02-10 18:37 ` seurer at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2023-02-10 22:52 ` hp at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-11-21 15:21 ` ro at gcc dot gnu.org
` (3 subsequent siblings)
15 siblings, 0 replies; 17+ messages in thread
From: hp at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2023-02-10 22:52 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106120
Hans-Peter Nilsson <hp at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|--- |FIXED
--- Comment #9 from Hans-Peter Nilsson <hp at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to seurer from comment #8)
> Yes, in the test run I just did it worked.
Ok, as this PR was "testsuite" as opposed to an underlying issue, I'm closing
this.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 17+ messages in thread
* [Bug testsuite/106120] [13 regression] g++.dg/warn/Wstringop-overflow-4.C fails since r13-1268-g8c99e307b20c50
2022-06-28 16:01 [Bug other/106120] New: [13 regression] g++.dg/warn/Wstringop-overflow-4.C fails since r13-1268-g8c99e307b20c50 seurer at gcc dot gnu.org
` (11 preceding siblings ...)
2023-02-10 22:52 ` hp at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2023-11-21 15:21 ` ro at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-11-21 17:54 ` hp at gcc dot gnu.org
` (2 subsequent siblings)
15 siblings, 0 replies; 17+ messages in thread
From: ro at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2023-11-21 15:21 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106120
Rainer Orth <ro at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |ro at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #10 from Rainer Orth <ro at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Since 20230106, this test produces an XPASS, according to gcc-testresults
postings this happens everywhere:
+XPASS: g++.dg/warn/Wstringop-overflow-4.C -std=gnu++98 pr106120 (test for
bogus messages, line 144)
The corresponding line is
T (S (2), new int16_t[r_imin_imax + 1]); // { dg-bogus "into a region of
size" "pr106120" { xfail { c++98_only } } }
I think that xfail should just be removed?
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 17+ messages in thread
* [Bug testsuite/106120] [13 regression] g++.dg/warn/Wstringop-overflow-4.C fails since r13-1268-g8c99e307b20c50
2022-06-28 16:01 [Bug other/106120] New: [13 regression] g++.dg/warn/Wstringop-overflow-4.C fails since r13-1268-g8c99e307b20c50 seurer at gcc dot gnu.org
` (12 preceding siblings ...)
2023-11-21 15:21 ` ro at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2023-11-21 17:54 ` hp at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-11-22 9:09 ` ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE
2023-11-23 0:29 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org
15 siblings, 0 replies; 17+ messages in thread
From: hp at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2023-11-21 17:54 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106120
--- Comment #11 from Hans-Peter Nilsson <hp at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to Rainer Orth from comment #10)
> Since 20230106, this test produces an XPASS, according to gcc-testresults
> postings this happens everywhere:
>
> +XPASS: g++.dg/warn/Wstringop-overflow-4.C -std=gnu++98 pr106120 (test for
> bogus messages, line 144)
>
> The corresponding line is
>
> T (S (2), new int16_t[r_imin_imax + 1]); // { dg-bogus "into a region of
> size" "pr106120" { xfail { c++98_only } } }
>
> I think that xfail should just be removed?
Yes, though I think the date 20230106 is wrong (at least regarding the
"everywhere") and maybe a typo for 20231006, at least according to my own logs
- where I unsurprisingly don't track XPASS. Gotta fix that.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 17+ messages in thread
* [Bug testsuite/106120] [13 regression] g++.dg/warn/Wstringop-overflow-4.C fails since r13-1268-g8c99e307b20c50
2022-06-28 16:01 [Bug other/106120] New: [13 regression] g++.dg/warn/Wstringop-overflow-4.C fails since r13-1268-g8c99e307b20c50 seurer at gcc dot gnu.org
` (13 preceding siblings ...)
2023-11-21 17:54 ` hp at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2023-11-22 9:09 ` ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE
2023-11-23 0:29 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org
15 siblings, 0 replies; 17+ messages in thread
From: ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE @ 2023-11-22 9:09 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106120
--- Comment #12 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE <ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE> ---
> --- Comment #11 from Hans-Peter Nilsson <hp at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
> (In reply to Rainer Orth from comment #10)
>> Since 20230106, this test produces an XPASS, according to gcc-testresults
>> postings this happens everywhere:
>>
>> +XPASS: g++.dg/warn/Wstringop-overflow-4.C -std=gnu++98 pr106120 (test for
>> bogus messages, line 144)
>>
>> The corresponding line is
>>
>> T (S (2), new int16_t[r_imin_imax + 1]); // { dg-bogus "into a region of
>> size" "pr106120" { xfail { c++98_only } } }
>>
>> I think that xfail should just be removed?
>
> Yes, though I think the date 20230106 is wrong (at least regarding the
> "everywhere") and maybe a typo for 20231006, at least according to my own logs
> - where I unsurprisingly don't track XPASS. Gotta fix that.
Actually, it's 20231106, I just cannot type. The XPASSes are included
in the make mail-report.log output, so I have them archived for my
targets.
Thanks for fixing this.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 17+ messages in thread
* [Bug testsuite/106120] [13 regression] g++.dg/warn/Wstringop-overflow-4.C fails since r13-1268-g8c99e307b20c50
2022-06-28 16:01 [Bug other/106120] New: [13 regression] g++.dg/warn/Wstringop-overflow-4.C fails since r13-1268-g8c99e307b20c50 seurer at gcc dot gnu.org
` (14 preceding siblings ...)
2023-11-22 9:09 ` ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE
@ 2023-11-23 0:29 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org
15 siblings, 0 replies; 17+ messages in thread
From: cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2023-11-23 0:29 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106120
--- Comment #13 from CVS Commits <cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
The master branch has been updated by Hans-Peter Nilsson <hp@gcc.gnu.org>:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:e935151bad1c2a02dc6a31fce3cc21b17d616243
commit r14-5767-ge935151bad1c2a02dc6a31fce3cc21b17d616243
Author: Hans-Peter Nilsson <hp@axis.com>
Date: Wed Nov 22 02:54:29 2023 +0100
testsuite: Tweak xfail bogus g++.dg/warn/Wstringop-overflow-4.C:144,
PR106120
The conditions under which this this bogus warning is
emitted has changed to not happen for 32-bit targets
anymore. Adjust accordingly.
PR testsuite/106120
* g++.dg/warn/Wstringop-overflow-4.C:144 XFAIL bogus warning for
lp64 targets with c++98.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 17+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2023-11-23 0:29 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 17+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2022-06-28 16:01 [Bug other/106120] New: [13 regression] g++.dg/warn/Wstringop-overflow-4.C fails since r13-1268-g8c99e307b20c50 seurer at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-06-28 17:25 ` [Bug other/106120] " aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-06-28 18:14 ` seurer at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-06-29 0:03 ` hp at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-06-29 9:44 ` [Bug testsuite/106120] " rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-07-08 23:10 ` hp at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-07-09 6:29 ` aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-12-14 15:50 ` danglin at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-12-20 14:05 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-02-10 0:41 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-02-10 18:34 ` hp at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-02-10 18:37 ` seurer at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-02-10 22:52 ` hp at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-11-21 15:21 ` ro at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-11-21 17:54 ` hp at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-11-22 9:09 ` ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE
2023-11-23 0:29 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org
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).