[Bug c/63510] New: Wrong line number in Wstrict-overflow message

[Bug c/63510] New: Wrong line number in Wstrict-overflow message

[ibuclaw at ubuntu dot com]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63510

            Bug ID: 63510
           Summary: Wrong line number in Wstrict-overflow message
           Product: gcc
           Version: 5.0
            Status: UNCONFIRMED
          Severity: normal
          Priority: P3
         Component: c
          Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
          Reporter: ibuclaw at ubuntu dot com

Tested on gcc (GCC) 5.0.0 20140901 (experimental)


Building GDB fails with the following error - both of which show the wrong
line.

../../gdb/i387-tdep.c: In function ‘i387_supply_fsave’:
../../gdb/i387-tdep.c:447:1: error: assuming signed overflow does not occur
when assuming that (X + c) >= X is always true [-Werror=strict-overflow]
 i387_supply_fsave (struct regcache *regcache, int regnum, const void *fsave)
 ^
../../gdb/i387-tdep.c: In function ‘i387_collect_fsave’:
../../gdb/i387-tdep.c:502:1: error: assuming signed overflow does not occur
when assuming that (X + c) >= X is always true [-Werror=strict-overflow]
 i387_collect_fsave (const struct regcache *regcache, int regnum, void *fsave)
 ^


Reduced to the following code, which shows both the correct and wrong line.

gcc -O2 -Wall -Wextra -c i387-tdep.c
---
int st0_regnum;

void i387_supply_fsave ()
{
  int i;
  for (i = st0_regnum; i < st0_regnum + 16;)
    {
    }
}
---
i387-tdep.c: In function ‘i387_supply_fsave’:
i387-tdep.c:9:1: warning: assuming signed overflow does not occur when assuming
that (X + c) >= X is always true [-Wstrict-overflow]
 }
 ^
i387-tdep.c:6:3: warning: assuming signed overflow does not occur when assuming
that (X + c) >= X is always true [-Wstrict-overflow]
   for (i = st0_regnum; i < st0_regnum + 16;)
   ^
>From gcc-bugs-return-463822-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Sat Oct 11 07:13:47 2014
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-463822-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 18928 invoked by alias); 11 Oct 2014 07:13:47 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 18905 invoked by uid 48); 11 Oct 2014 07:13:44 -0000
From: "ibuclaw at ubuntu dot com" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug c/63510] Wrong line number in Wstrict-overflow message
Date: Sat, 11 Oct 2014 07:13:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: c
X-Bugzilla-Version: 5.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords:
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: ibuclaw at ubuntu dot com
X-Bugzilla-Status: UNCONFIRMED
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: ---
X-Bugzilla-Flags:
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields:
Message-ID: <bug-63510-4-2Tgyhh5vXn@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-63510-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-63510-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Bugzilla-URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-SW-Source: 2014-10/txt/msg00843.txt.bz2
Content-length: 238

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?idc510

--- Comment #1 from Iain Buclaw <ibuclaw at ubuntu dot com> ---
> Reduced to the following code, which shows both the correct and wrong line.

But perhaps the wrong column information.

[Bug middle-end/63510] Wrong line number in Wstrict-overflow message

[manu at gcc dot gnu.org]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63510

Manuel López-Ibáñez <manu at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|UNCONFIRMED                 |NEW
   Last reconfirmed|                            |2014-10-11
                 CC|                            |manu at gcc dot gnu.org
          Component|c                           |middle-end
         Depends on|                            |63451
     Ever confirmed|0                           |1

--- Comment #2 from Manuel López-Ibáñez <manu at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
The obviously wrong one is due to this:

Index: tree-ssa-sccvn.c
===================================================================
--- tree-ssa-sccvn.c    (revision 216098)
+++ tree-ssa-sccvn.c    (working copy)
@@ -4249,12 +4249,13 @@ cond_dom_walker::before_dom_children (ba
           the valueization of the defining stmt.  */
        if (TREE_CODE (lhs) == SSA_NAME)
          lhs = vn_get_expr_for (lhs);
        if (TREE_CODE (rhs) == SSA_NAME)
          rhs = vn_get_expr_for (rhs);
-       val = fold_binary (gimple_cond_code (stmt),
-                          boolean_type_node, lhs, rhs);
+       val = fold_binary_loc (gimple_location (stmt),
+                              gimple_cond_code (stmt),
+                              boolean_type_node, lhs, rhs);
        break;
       }
     case GIMPLE_SWITCH:
       val = gimple_switch_index (stmt);
       break;

(Anything in the middle-end that relies on input_location is broken.
Unfortunately, we don't have enough people to take care of cleaning up this)

The other location issue is PR63451.
>From gcc-bugs-return-463837-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Sat Oct 11 15:10:27 2014
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-463837-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 13465 invoked by alias); 11 Oct 2014 15:10:27 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 13441 invoked by uid 48); 11 Oct 2014 15:10:23 -0000
From: "schwab@linux-m68k.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug c++/63511] "internal consistency failure" compiling gcc-4.9.1 (gcc/tree-sra.c)
Date: Sat, 11 Oct 2014 15:10:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: c++
X-Bugzilla-Version: 4.2.1
X-Bugzilla-Keywords:
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: schwab@linux-m68k.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: RESOLVED
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: ---
X-Bugzilla-Flags:
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: bug_status resolution short_desc
Message-ID: <bug-63511-4-8jPmOyBZmN@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-63511-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-63511-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Bugzilla-URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-SW-Source: 2014-10/txt/msg00858.txt.bz2
Content-length: 699

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?idc511

Andreas Schwab <schwab@linux-m68k.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|UNCONFIRMED                 |RESOLVED
         Resolution|---                         |WONTFIX
            Summary|"internal consistency       |"internal consistency
                   |failure" compiling          |failure" compiling
                   |gcc-2.9.1 (gcc/tree-sra.c)  |gcc-4.9.1 (gcc/tree-sra.c)

--- Comment #1 from Andreas Schwab <schwab@linux-m68k.org> ---
You should report that to Synology.  gcc 4.2 is not longer maintained.

[Bug middle-end/63510] Wrong line number in Wstrict-overflow message

[gang.chen.5i5j at gmail dot com]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63510

--- Comment #3 from Chen Gang <gang.chen.5i5j at gmail dot com> ---
It still exists in gcc version 5.0.0 20141109 (experimental) (GCC), I shall try
to solve it.

Hope I can finish within 2 months.

[Bug middle-end/63510] Wrong line number in Wstrict-overflow message

[gang.chen.5i5j at gmail dot com]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63510

--- Comment #4 from Chen Gang <gang.chen.5i5j at gmail dot com> ---
For gcc version 5.0.0 20150109 (experimental) (GCC), can not find this warnings
again.
So at present, for me, this bug can be closed.

[Bug middle-end/63510] Wrong line number in Wstrict-overflow message

[ibuclaw at ubuntu dot com]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63510

--- Comment #5 from Iain Buclaw <ibuclaw at ubuntu dot com> ---
I can still reproduce the wrong-line diagnostic using gcc (GCC) 6.0.0 20150720
(experimental).

However GDB has been building just fine for a while now.  But I don't know if
that is due to a change on GCC or GDB side.

[Bug middle-end/63510] Wrong line number in Wstrict-overflow message

[manu at gcc dot gnu.org]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63510

--- Comment #6 from Manuel López-Ibáñez <manu at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to Iain Buclaw from comment #5)
> I can still reproduce the wrong-line diagnostic using gcc (GCC) 6.0.0
> 20150720 (experimental).
> 
> However GDB has been building just fine for a while now.  But I don't know
> if that is due to a change on GCC or GDB side.

Probably GDB worked around the issue or silence the warning via #pragma. That
doesn't mean that the bug is fixed.
>From gcc-bugs-return-494102-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Tue Aug 04 16:48:39 2015
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-494102-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 102785 invoked by alias); 4 Aug 2015 16:48:39 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 102367 invoked by uid 48); 4 Aug 2015 16:48:35 -0000
From: "redi at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug libstdc++/67116] incorrect detection of thread model when cross-compiling the tool chain
Date: Tue, 04 Aug 2015 16:48:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: libstdc++
X-Bugzilla-Version: 5.2.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords:
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: redi at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: WAITING
X-Bugzilla-Resolution:
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: ---
X-Bugzilla-Flags:
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields:
Message-ID: <bug-67116-4-xAcmYfyX9i@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-67116-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-67116-4@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
X-SW-Source: 2015-08/txt/msg00244.txt.bz2
Content-length: 474

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67116

--- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely <redi at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to Cezary Śliwa from comment #2)
> This is a quite special case, target and host architecture are the same,
> only the thread models are different. I think libstdc++ uses the
> preinstalled compiler rather that the one just built. 

If that is happening it's certainly a bug. Could you attach the
$target/libstdc++-v3/config.log please?
>From gcc-bugs-return-494103-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Tue Aug 04 16:50:30 2015
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-494103-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 110394 invoked by alias); 4 Aug 2015 16:50:30 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 110356 invoked by uid 55); 4 Aug 2015 16:50:26 -0000
From: "nsz at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug target/66731] vnmul, fnmul patterns incorrect for -frounding-math
Date: Tue, 04 Aug 2015 16:50:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: target
X-Bugzilla-Version: 4.9.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: wrong-code
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: nsz at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: NEW
X-Bugzilla-Resolution:
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: nsz at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: ---
X-Bugzilla-Flags:
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields:
Message-ID: <bug-66731-4-Nr2SEBNB25@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-66731-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-66731-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Bugzilla-URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-SW-Source: 2015-08/txt/msg00245.txt.bz2
Content-length: 598

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?idf731

--- Comment #9 from nsz at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: nsz
Date: Tue Aug  4 16:49:54 2015
New Revision: 226588

URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev"6588&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Fix broken backport patch.

gcc:

        Backport from mainline:
        2015-08-04  Szabolcs Nagy  <szabolcs.nagy@arm.com>

        PR target/66731
        * config/aarch64/aarch64.c (aarch64_rtx_costs): Fix NEG cost for FNMUL.
        (aarch64_rtx_mult_cost): Fix MULT cost with -frounding-math.


Modified:
    branches/gcc-5-branch/gcc/config/aarch64/aarch64.c

[Bug middle-end/63510] Wrong line number in Wstrict-overflow message

[xili_gchen_5257 at hotmail dot com]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63510

--- Comment #7 from xili_gchen_5257 at hotmail dot com ---
On 8/5/15 00:45, manu at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63510
> 
> --- Comment #6 from Manuel López-Ibáñez <manu at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
> (In reply to Iain Buclaw from comment #5)
>> I can still reproduce the wrong-line diagnostic using gcc (GCC) 6.0.0
>> 20150720 (experimental).
>>
>> However GDB has been building just fine for a while now.  But I don't know
>> if that is due to a change on GCC or GDB side.
> 
> Probably GDB worked around the issue or silence the warning via #pragma. That
> doesn't mean that the bug is fixed.
> 

OK, thanks. I shall try to start analyzing it in 2015-08-20, and try to
fix it within this month -- during these days, I am trying tilegx qemu
for gcc testsuite.

And welcome another members to analyze it.

Thanks.
>From gcc-bugs-return-494187-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Wed Aug 05 14:59:50 2015
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-494187-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 23353 invoked by alias); 5 Aug 2015 14:59:49 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 23316 invoked by uid 48); 5 Aug 2015 14:59:45 -0000
From: "boger at us dot ibm.com" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug go/66870] split stack issues on ppc64le and ppc64
Date: Wed, 05 Aug 2015 14:59:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: go
X-Bugzilla-Version: 6.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords:
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: boger at us dot ibm.com
X-Bugzilla-Status: NEW
X-Bugzilla-Resolution:
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: ian at airs dot com
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: ---
X-Bugzilla-Flags:
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields:
Message-ID: <bug-66870-4-UAZ1nWDT8W@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-66870-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-66870-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Bugzilla-URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-SW-Source: 2015-08/txt/msg00329.txt.bz2
Content-length: 1247

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?idf870

--- Comment #19 from boger at us dot ibm.com ---
(In reply to Ian Lance Taylor from comment #18)
> In the patch in comment #17, the code in gcc/configure.ac looks misplaced:
> shouldn't it be before the ";;", and not add another ";;"?
>
> Can you explain why the test in libgo/configure.ac will fail for a linker
> that does not support split-stack?  I'm not quite seeing it.  I haven't
> tried it, though.

For ppc64le, some split stack support was recently added to the gold linker by
Alan, so if you try to use a gold linker that is too old, you will get an error
like this:

/usr/bin/ld.gold -o sss ss-callee.o ss-call.o  --defsym __morestack=0
/usr/bin/ld.gold: error: linker does not include stack split support required
by ss-call.o

But with one after he added the support, it does not get this error.  If it is
not gold then it doesn't get the error either.

However on ppc64 (BE, not LE) it never gets the error, old or new gold.  Alan
would have to answer why.  I don't know about other targets, I haven't tried
it.

I suppose the test could be on the version number for the gold linker at least
for ppc64 LE or BE.

Sorry I probably messed up the ;; I will double check on that.

[Bug middle-end/63510] Wrong line number in Wstrict-overflow message

[gang.chen.5i5j at gmail dot com]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63510

--- Comment #8 from Chen Gang <gang.chen.5i5j at gmail dot com> ---
For the latest gcc, it still has this issue, I shall try to fix it during these
days (hope can fix it within this month).

Thanks.

[Bug middle-end/63510] Wrong line number in Wstrict-overflow message

[gang.chen.5i5j at gmail dot com]

[-- Warning: decoded text below may be mangled, UTF-8 assumed --]
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8", Size: 3072 bytes --]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63510

--- Comment #10 from Chen Gang <gang.chen.5i5j at gmail dot com> ---
Need use gimple_location(stmt) for it. The stmt is the variable in
gcc/tree-ssa-sccvn.c before call fold_binary(). But unlucky, it is not passed
into fold_binary(), we can not get it directly.

After try a temporary fix, the related output is:

[root@localhost build-gcc-x86_64]# gcc -O2 -Wall -Wextra -c /tmp/i387-tdep.c

when assuming that (X + c) >= X is always true
/tmp/i387-tdep.c: In function ‘i387_supply_fsave’:
/tmp/i387-tdep.c:6:3: warning: assuming signed overflow does not occur when
assuming that (X + c) >= X is always true [-Wstrict-overflow]
   for (i = st0_regnum; i < st0_regnum + 16;)
   ^


I shall try to give a normal fix for it, next.
>From gcc-bugs-return-495839-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Sat Aug 29 00:42:11 2015
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-495839-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 58652 invoked by alias); 29 Aug 2015 00:42:11 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 58613 invoked by uid 48); 29 Aug 2015 00:42:08 -0000
From: "jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug fortran/67367] Program crashes on READ(IOSTAT=IOS, ...) on directory OPEN()ed without error
Date: Sat, 29 Aug 2015 00:42:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: fortran
X-Bugzilla-Version: 4.9.3
X-Bugzilla-Keywords:
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: NEW
X-Bugzilla-Resolution:
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: ---
X-Bugzilla-Flags:
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: attachments.created
Message-ID: <bug-67367-4-0LiyvqsFxY@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-67367-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-67367-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Bugzilla-URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-SW-Source: 2015-08/txt/msg01981.txt.bz2
Content-length: 423

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?idg367

--- Comment #6 from Jerry DeLisle <jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Created attachment 36266
  --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id6266&actioníit
Better than preliminary

This patch returns the correct code from raw_read and we get the "Is a
directory"
error message as we should.  I think this is it.  I will regression test and
work up a test case.

[Bug middle-end/63510] Wrong line number in Wstrict-overflow message

[gang.chen.5i5j at gmail dot com]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63510

--- Comment #11 from Chen Gang <gang.chen.5i5j at gmail dot com> ---
Created attachment 36267
  --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=36267&action=edit
The related fix patch for it.

The related fix patch for it: current input_location isn't precise for
reporting warning. The correct location is gimple location of current
statement.

[Bug middle-end/63510] Wrong line number in Wstrict-overflow message

[gang.chen.5i5j at gmail dot com]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63510

--- Comment #12 from Chen Gang <gang.chen.5i5j at gmail dot com> ---
The patch passes "make check". I guess, it should be OK.

[Bug middle-end/63510] Wrong line number in Wstrict-overflow message

[gang.chen.5i5j at gmail dot com]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63510

--- Comment #13 from Chen Gang <gang.chen.5i5j at gmail dot com> ---
gcc version 6.0.0 20151023 (experimental) (GCC) has no this issue (I guess, the
reason is that it calls gimple_simplify instead of fold_binary).

For me, this issue can be closed.

Thanks.

[Bug middle-end/63510] Wrong line number in Wstrict-overflow message

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63510
Bug 63510 depends on bug 63451, which changed state.

Bug 63451 Summary: bad location for the condition in for-loops
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63451

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|NEW                         |RESOLVED
         Resolution|---                         |FIXED