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 E9ECD3858425; Tue, 20 Dec 2022 15:56:49 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org E9ECD3858425
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gcc.gnu.org;
	s=default; t=1671551809;
	bh=3jieAyS5cRsayQ7KBmbf7EuX3jCLaXFPCjfJ/1KA/Lw=;
	h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From;
	b=N+JQLhCWYpUmrCxzsmhQtmClwGED/QKAsiV6XU/gzkaLPm6k3Mxigg7XyoPXCno2C
	 sD70V4fgkSvnRoFgT9vuEZuhHnwwOKdTNLXjeOLL+mnaLe2CQuc8got2BjUbyeRixS
	 tB4Voh7gFOiOtyWxdGZuAq4EQJP7JdVmU0nzAgc0=
From: "rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug tree-optimization/107751] [11/12/13 regression] False positive
 -Wmaybe-uninitialized at -O0
Date: Tue, 20 Dec 2022 15:56:49 +0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: tree-optimization
X-Bugzilla-Version: 12.2.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: diagnostic
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: NEW
X-Bugzilla-Resolution: 
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P2
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: 11.4
X-Bugzilla-Flags: 
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: priority
Message-ID: <bug-107751-4-fzsaR3R1Bi@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-107751-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-107751-4@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=3D107751

Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
           Priority|P3                          |P2

--- Comment #4 from Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #2)
> Reduced testcase (removes the templates, also now able to compile as C):
> typedef const int T1;
> typedef const int T2;
> void std_equal(T1* a1, T1* a2, T2* b1);
> void f() {
>     int a[3] =3D {1, 2, 3};
>     T1* x    =3D a;
>     T2* y    =3D a;
>     std_equal(x, x+3, y);
> }

It's also odd we diagnose x + 3 but not x + 2.  We're using
ao_ref_init_from_ptr_and_size but that's not a good measure,
esp. for

  /* Do not warn if the access is zero size or if it's fully outside
     the object.  */
  poly_int64 decl_size;
  if (known_size_p (ref.size)
      && known_eq (ref.max_size, ref.size)
      && (known_eq (ref.size, 0)
          || known_le (ref.offset + ref.size, 0)))
    return NULL_TREE;

also given that this function doesn't do a good job at gettting at &a for
the IL at -O0 which is

  <bb 2> :
  a[0] =3D 1;
  a[1] =3D 2;
  a[2] =3D 3;
  x_6 =3D &a;
  y_7 =3D &a;
  _1 =3D x_6 + 8;
  std_equal (x_6, _1, y_7);

note that a function receiving x + O can adjust this pointer before reading
from it so using [x+O, +INF] as access range to find initialization isn't
the best thing to do.=