public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "enkovich.gnu at gmail dot com" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug tree-optimization/64277] [4.9/5 Regression] Incorrect warning "array subscript is above array bounds"
Date: Mon, 26 Jan 2015 13:51:00 -0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <bug-64277-4-y999DDHVAx@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <bug-64277-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64277

--- Comment #12 from Ilya Enkovich <enkovich.gnu at gmail dot com> ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #10)
> Ick - that will also paper over good warnings so I'd rather not do that.

I'm also worried about possible good warnings removal.  Thus I disable them
only in case cunroll speculates about iterations number and never disable them
for the first loop iteration.

I agree warnings disabling looks like a workaround.  But it doesn't seem
correct to complain on code generated by compiler and probably never executed. 
Each time maxiter is used for complete unroll following optimizations may
improve maxiter estimation and thus we get a compiler generated dead code which
still may produce warnings.


  parent reply	other threads:[~2015-01-26 13:51 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 24+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2014-12-11 20:42 [Bug tree-optimization/64277] New: [4.9/5.0 " aivchenk at gmail dot com
2014-12-12  9:36 ` [Bug tree-optimization/64277] " rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2014-12-23 17:35 ` izamyatin at gmail dot com
2014-12-23 20:19 ` manu at gcc dot gnu.org
2014-12-23 20:58 ` aivchenk at gmail dot com
2015-01-12  8:50 ` izamyatin at gmail dot com
2015-01-15  9:05 ` izamyatin at gmail dot com
2015-01-21 15:02 ` [Bug tree-optimization/64277] [4.9/5 " izamyatin at gmail dot com
2015-01-26 12:33 ` enkovich.gnu at gmail dot com
2015-01-26 12:33 ` enkovich.gnu at gmail dot com
2015-01-26 12:43 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2015-01-26 13:34 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2015-01-26 13:51 ` enkovich.gnu at gmail dot com [this message]
2015-01-26 15:08 ` enkovich.gnu at gmail dot com
2015-01-27  9:51 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2015-01-27  9:52 ` [Bug tree-optimization/64277] [4.9 " rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2015-01-27 10:04 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2015-01-27 11:04 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2015-01-28 11:42 ` ienkovich at gcc dot gnu.org
2015-01-28 22:15 ` rth at gcc dot gnu.org
2015-02-19 14:14 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2015-02-19 14:15 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2015-02-24 13:05 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2015-04-16 12:03 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=bug-64277-4-y999DDHVAx@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/ \
    --to=gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org \
    --cc=gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body. 
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).