[Bug other/106120] New: [13 regression] g++.dg/warn/Wstringop-overflow-4.C fails since r13-1268-g8c99e307b20c50

[Bug other/106120] New: [13 regression] g++.dg/warn/Wstringop-overflow-4.C fails since r13-1268-g8c99e307b20c50

[seurer at gcc dot gnu.org]

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

[Bug other/106120] [13 regression] g++.dg/warn/Wstringop-overflow-4.C fails since r13-1268-g8c99e307b20c50

[aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org]

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.

[Bug other/106120] [13 regression] g++.dg/warn/Wstringop-overflow-4.C fails since r13-1268-g8c99e307b20c50

[seurer at gcc dot gnu.org]

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.

[Bug other/106120] [13 regression] g++.dg/warn/Wstringop-overflow-4.C fails since r13-1268-g8c99e307b20c50

[hp at gcc dot gnu.org]

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=]

[Bug testsuite/106120] [13 regression] g++.dg/warn/Wstringop-overflow-4.C fails since r13-1268-g8c99e307b20c50

[rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org]

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

[Bug testsuite/106120] [13 regression] g++.dg/warn/Wstringop-overflow-4.C fails since r13-1268-g8c99e307b20c50

[hp at gcc dot gnu.org]

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?

[Bug testsuite/106120] [13 regression] g++.dg/warn/Wstringop-overflow-4.C fails since r13-1268-g8c99e307b20c50

[aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org]

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.

[Bug testsuite/106120] [13 regression] g++.dg/warn/Wstringop-overflow-4.C fails since r13-1268-g8c99e307b20c50

[danglin at gcc dot gnu.org]

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

[Bug testsuite/106120] [13 regression] g++.dg/warn/Wstringop-overflow-4.C fails since r13-1268-g8c99e307b20c50

[rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org]

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

[Bug testsuite/106120] [13 regression] g++.dg/warn/Wstringop-overflow-4.C fails since r13-1268-g8c99e307b20c50

[cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org]

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.

[Bug testsuite/106120] [13 regression] g++.dg/warn/Wstringop-overflow-4.C fails since r13-1268-g8c99e307b20c50

[hp at gcc dot gnu.org]

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.

[Bug testsuite/106120] [13 regression] g++.dg/warn/Wstringop-overflow-4.C fails since r13-1268-g8c99e307b20c50

[seurer at gcc dot gnu.org]

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.

[Bug testsuite/106120] [13 regression] g++.dg/warn/Wstringop-overflow-4.C fails since r13-1268-g8c99e307b20c50

[hp at gcc dot gnu.org]

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.

[Bug testsuite/106120] [13 regression] g++.dg/warn/Wstringop-overflow-4.C fails since r13-1268-g8c99e307b20c50

[ro at gcc dot gnu.org]

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?

[Bug testsuite/106120] [13 regression] g++.dg/warn/Wstringop-overflow-4.C fails since r13-1268-g8c99e307b20c50

[hp at gcc dot gnu.org]

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.

[Bug testsuite/106120] [13 regression] g++.dg/warn/Wstringop-overflow-4.C fails since r13-1268-g8c99e307b20c50

[ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE]

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.

[Bug testsuite/106120] [13 regression] g++.dg/warn/Wstringop-overflow-4.C fails since r13-1268-g8c99e307b20c50

[cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org]

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.