public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* [Bug tree-optimization/62033] New: okteta 4.13.97 error at -O3 -D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=2 @ 2014-08-06 9:03 amodra at gmail dot com 2014-08-06 9:09 ` [Bug tree-optimization/62033] " pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org ` (2 more replies) 0 siblings, 3 replies; 4+ messages in thread From: amodra at gmail dot com @ 2014-08-06 9:03 UTC (permalink / raw) To: gcc-bugs https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62033 Bug ID: 62033 Summary: okteta 4.13.97 error at -O3 -D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=2 Product: gcc Version: 4.10.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: tree-optimization Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: amodra at gmail dot com Created attachment 33257 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=33257&action=edit delta+hand reduced testcase Found on powerpc64le with 4.9, and then with x86_64 4.10.0 20140727 Due to __warn_memset_zero_len reference in object, we get .../bytearraymodel_p.o: In function `memset': .../bits/string3.h:81: warning: memset used with constant zero length parameter; this could be due to transposed parameters collect2: error: ld returned 1 exit status Compile testcase with -O3 -fvisibility=hidden -Werror=return-type -fvisibility-inlines-hidden ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* [Bug tree-optimization/62033] okteta 4.13.97 error at -O3 -D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=2 2014-08-06 9:03 [Bug tree-optimization/62033] New: okteta 4.13.97 error at -O3 -D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=2 amodra at gmail dot com @ 2014-08-06 9:09 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org 2014-08-06 9:52 ` amodra at gmail dot com 2014-08-06 15:30 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org 2 siblings, 0 replies; 4+ messages in thread From: pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2014-08-06 9:09 UTC (permalink / raw) To: gcc-bugs https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62033 --- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org> --- I don't see a bug here as there is one case where addSize can return 0 and with jump threading and basic block copying, we get a zero size passed to memset. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* [Bug tree-optimization/62033] okteta 4.13.97 error at -O3 -D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=2 2014-08-06 9:03 [Bug tree-optimization/62033] New: okteta 4.13.97 error at -O3 -D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=2 amodra at gmail dot com 2014-08-06 9:09 ` [Bug tree-optimization/62033] " pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2014-08-06 9:52 ` amodra at gmail dot com 2014-08-06 15:30 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org 2 siblings, 0 replies; 4+ messages in thread From: amodra at gmail dot com @ 2014-08-06 9:52 UTC (permalink / raw) To: gcc-bugs https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62033 --- Comment #2 from Alan Modra <amodra at gmail dot com> --- I can see where you're coming from Andrew, but what is disconcerting about this is that the _FORTIFY_SOURCE warning is plainly incorrect here. How is one supposed to write a string.h memset macro using __builtin_constant_p() to provide a useful _FORTIFY_SOURCE warning, in the face of this sort of optimisation? Users are going to see this as "__builtin_constant_p() is broken". ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* [Bug tree-optimization/62033] okteta 4.13.97 error at -O3 -D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=2 2014-08-06 9:03 [Bug tree-optimization/62033] New: okteta 4.13.97 error at -O3 -D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=2 amodra at gmail dot com 2014-08-06 9:09 ` [Bug tree-optimization/62033] " pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org 2014-08-06 9:52 ` amodra at gmail dot com @ 2014-08-06 15:30 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org 2 siblings, 0 replies; 4+ messages in thread From: pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2014-08-06 15:30 UTC (permalink / raw) To: gcc-bugs https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62033 Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE --- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org> --- (In reply to Alan Modra from comment #2) > I can see where you're coming from Andrew, but what is disconcerting about > this is that the _FORTIFY_SOURCE warning is plainly incorrect here. How is > one supposed to write a string.h memset macro using __builtin_constant_p() > to provide a useful _FORTIFY_SOURCE warning, in the face of this sort of > optimisation? This is why Jakub moved it to the front-end away from glibc (See PR 61294). > > Users are going to see this as "__builtin_constant_p() is broken". It is not. It is working correctly as on that path, it is constant. This is an exact duplicate of bug 61294 really. *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 61294 *** ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2014-08-06 15:30 UTC | newest] Thread overview: 4+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed) -- links below jump to the message on this page -- 2014-08-06 9:03 [Bug tree-optimization/62033] New: okteta 4.13.97 error at -O3 -D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=2 amodra at gmail dot com 2014-08-06 9:09 ` [Bug tree-optimization/62033] " pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org 2014-08-06 9:52 ` amodra at gmail dot com 2014-08-06 15:30 ` pinskia 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).