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 065FD389EC64; Mon,  5 Dec 2022 13:15:59 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 065FD389EC64
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gcc.gnu.org;
	s=default; t=1670246160;
	bh=ve+LaB5IaXePk/MWsUIShEmBSkywsPSIL9Y9Gj6ZynU=;
	h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From;
	b=i9kTJGSKEVybuqSbXQKolJPloWG+HdgazKlcvJSTvD4x9pctLEr8ZDbvIeq5sGQoV
	 JRDn4cnK1eZ/LO9RbbkvjX22hZa31hV4FPaC3IpNQ18Cr2hZP8xaw8UqXuhcBDy51T
	 CGYKpxK1AGd9+PIH5dDWY25iGNhn1qB++yjT80Z0=
From: "jakub at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug tree-optimization/107952] tree-object-size: inconsistent size
 for flexible arrays nested in structs
Date: Mon, 05 Dec 2022 13:15:59 +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: 13.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: wrong-code
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: UNCONFIRMED
X-Bugzilla-Resolution: 
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: siddhesh at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: ---
X-Bugzilla-Flags: 
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: cc
Message-ID: <bug-107952-4-WmksJeZHTr@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-107952-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-107952-4@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=3D107952

Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |jakub at gcc dot gnu.org

--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
When writing tree-object-size.c, the intent was to find some balance between
catching up dangerous cases and allowing what a lot of programs in the wild=
 use
and it took about a year to stabilize that.  Sure, with a new non-default
option that requests stricter behavior it is possible to change it.=