public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* [Bug regression/42145] New: Incorrect "may be used uninitialized warning" for a very specific test case @ 2009-11-22 14:42 colin at reactos dot org 2009-11-22 14:44 ` [Bug regression/42145] " colin at reactos dot org ` (2 more replies) 0 siblings, 3 replies; 4+ messages in thread From: colin at reactos dot org @ 2009-11-22 14:42 UTC (permalink / raw) To: gcc-bugs I'm compiling the attached test case with "gcc version 4.5.0 20091018 (experimental) [trunk revision 152966] (Ubuntu 20091018-0ubuntu1)". When using the command line "gcc -Wuninitialized -Os -o test test_gccbug.c", I'm getting the following incorrect warning: test_gccbug.c: In function 'main': test_gccbug.c:17:6: warning: 'ret' may be used uninitialized in this function Same happens with different builds of GCC 4.4.2, 4.4.1 and 4.3.4. No such warning occurs with builds of GCC 4.2.4 and 4.1.3. This problem does not occur if one or more of the following is done: - You change the optimization level to -O0 or -O1 (-O2 and -O3 still trigger the bug in this GCC 4.5.0 version, but not always in older versions I've tested) - You comment out line 10 of the test case - You change line 22 of the test case to just 'if (!argc)' -- Summary: Incorrect "may be used uninitialized warning" for a very specific test case Product: gcc Version: 4.5.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: regression AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org ReportedBy: colin at reactos dot org http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42145 ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* [Bug regression/42145] Incorrect "may be used uninitialized warning" for a very specific test case 2009-11-22 14:42 [Bug regression/42145] New: Incorrect "may be used uninitialized warning" for a very specific test case colin at reactos dot org @ 2009-11-22 14:44 ` colin at reactos dot org 2009-11-22 14:44 ` colin at reactos dot org 2009-12-30 16:59 ` manu at gcc dot gnu dot org 2 siblings, 0 replies; 4+ messages in thread From: colin at reactos dot org @ 2009-11-22 14:44 UTC (permalink / raw) To: gcc-bugs ------- Comment #1 from colin at reactos dot org 2009-11-22 14:43 ------- Created an attachment (id=19084) --> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=19084&action=view) The test case -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42145 ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* [Bug regression/42145] Incorrect "may be used uninitialized warning" for a very specific test case 2009-11-22 14:42 [Bug regression/42145] New: Incorrect "may be used uninitialized warning" for a very specific test case colin at reactos dot org 2009-11-22 14:44 ` [Bug regression/42145] " colin at reactos dot org @ 2009-11-22 14:44 ` colin at reactos dot org 2009-12-30 16:59 ` manu at gcc dot gnu dot org 2 siblings, 0 replies; 4+ messages in thread From: colin at reactos dot org @ 2009-11-22 14:44 UTC (permalink / raw) To: gcc-bugs ------- Comment #2 from colin at reactos dot org 2009-11-22 14:44 ------- Created an attachment (id=19085) --> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=19085&action=view) The preprocessed test case -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42145 ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* [Bug regression/42145] Incorrect "may be used uninitialized warning" for a very specific test case 2009-11-22 14:42 [Bug regression/42145] New: Incorrect "may be used uninitialized warning" for a very specific test case colin at reactos dot org 2009-11-22 14:44 ` [Bug regression/42145] " colin at reactos dot org 2009-11-22 14:44 ` colin at reactos dot org @ 2009-12-30 16:59 ` manu at gcc dot gnu dot org 2 siblings, 0 replies; 4+ messages in thread From: manu at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2009-12-30 16:59 UTC (permalink / raw) To: gcc-bugs ------- Comment #3 from manu at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-30 16:59 ------- This would need conditional PHIs, so a duplicate of PR20968. GCC never detects that ret is always initialized, it doesn't warn because at low optimization levels we do not warn for PHIs or because CCP (PR18501) just initializes the variable (probably to 1 or 10). There is some differences between the dumps of -O1 and -O2 in the way the logical or is transformed int bitwise-or and how dom1 deals with each of them, but I cannot tell if there is some missing optimization involved. *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 20968 *** -- manu at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |manu at gcc dot gnu dot org Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution| |DUPLICATE http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42145 ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2009-12-30 16:59 UTC | newest] Thread overview: 4+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed) -- links below jump to the message on this page -- 2009-11-22 14:42 [Bug regression/42145] New: Incorrect "may be used uninitialized warning" for a very specific test case colin at reactos dot org 2009-11-22 14:44 ` [Bug regression/42145] " colin at reactos dot org 2009-11-22 14:44 ` colin at reactos dot org 2009-12-30 16:59 ` manu at gcc dot gnu dot 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).