public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* [Bug lto/65991] New: maybe-unitialized - false positive
@ 2015-05-03 13:23 dilyan.palauzov at aegee dot org
2015-05-03 13:28 ` [Bug lto/65991] " trippels at gcc dot gnu.org
` (3 more replies)
0 siblings, 4 replies; 5+ messages in thread
From: dilyan.palauzov at aegee dot org @ 2015-05-03 13:23 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65991
Bug ID: 65991
Summary: maybe-unitialized - false positive
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: lto
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: dilyan.palauzov at aegee dot org
Target Milestone: ---
I have compiled gcc with
../gcc-4.9.2/configure --prefix=/usr --sysconfdir=/etc --localstatedir=/var
--enable-threads=posix --enable-nls --enable-interpreter --with-system-zlib
--enable-libgcj-multifile --enable-languages=all --enable-targets=all
--with-system-unwind --without-x --with-linker-hash-style=gnu --enable-multilib
--disable-multilib --with-arch=nocona
export CFLAGS="-pipe -O3 -fno-fat-lto-objects -flto"
export CXXFLAGS="-pipe -O3 -fno-fat-lto-objects -flto"
Then I try to compile binutils (at commit 01a97082d0e9) with
configure --enable-lto --enable-plugins --enable-threads --enable-gold=yes
--with-zlib
CFLAGS='-pipe -O3 -fno-fat-lto-objects -flto'
LDFLAGS='-Wl,-O1 -Wl,-z,relro -Wl,-s'
bintuils utilizies internally -Werror and compiling it fails with LTO error at:
make[2]: Entering directory '/mnt/new/src/gcc/binutil-git/gas'
/bin/sh ./libtool --tag=CC --mode=link gcc -W -Wall -Wstrict-prototypes
-Wmissing-prototypes -Wshadow -Werror -I/home/git/binutils-gdb/gas/../zlib
-pipe -O3 -fno-fat-lto-objects -flto -Wl,-O1 -Wl,-z,relro -Wl,-s -o as-new
app.o as.o atof-generic.o compress-debug.o cond.o depend.o dwarf2dbg.o
dw2gencfi.o ecoff.o ehopt.o expr.o flonum-copy.o flonum-konst.o flonum-mult.o
frags.o hash.o input-file.o input-scrub.o listing.o literal.o macro.o
messages.o output-file.o read.o remap.o sb.o stabs.o subsegs.o symbols.o
write.o tc-i386.o obj-elf.o atof-ieee.o ../opcodes/libopcodes.la
../bfd/libbfd.la ../libiberty/libiberty.a -ldl
libtool: link: gcc -W -Wall -Wstrict-prototypes -Wmissing-prototypes -Wshadow
-Werror -I/home/git/binutils-gdb/gas/../zlib -pipe -O3 -fno-fat-lto-objects
-flto -Wl,-O1 -Wl,-z -Wl,relro -Wl,-s -o as-new app.o as.o atof-generic.o
compress-debug.o cond.o depend.o dwarf2dbg.o dw2gencfi.o ecoff.o ehopt.o expr.o
flonum-copy.o flonum-konst.o flonum-mult.o frags.o hash.o input-file.o
input-scrub.o listing.o literal.o macro.o messages.o output-file.o read.o
remap.o sb.o stabs.o subsegs.o symbols.o write.o tc-i386.o obj-elf.o
atof-ieee.o ../opcodes/.libs/libopcodes.a ../bfd/.libs/libbfd.a
-L/src/gcc/binutil-git/zlib -lz ../libiberty/libiberty.a -ldl
/home/git/binutils-gdb/bfd/compress.c: In function
'bfd_compress_section_contents':
/home/git/binutils-gdb/bfd/compress.c:161:4: error: 'zlib_size' may be used
uninitialized in this function [-Werror=maybe-uninitialized]
memmove (buffer + compression_header_size,
^
/home/git/binutils-gdb/bfd/compress.c:88:7: note: 'zlib_size' was declared here
int zlib_size;
^
lto1: all warnings being treated as errors
lto-wrapper: gcc returned 1 exit status
/usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/4.9.2/../../../../x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/bin/ld:
lto-wrapper failed
collect2: error: ld returned 1 exit status
Makefile:769: recipe for target 'as-new' failed
make[2]: *** [as-new] Error 1
make[2]: Leaving directory '/mnt/new/src/gcc/binutil-git/gas'
See also https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18313 .
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* [Bug lto/65991] maybe-unitialized - false positive
2015-05-03 13:23 [Bug lto/65991] New: maybe-unitialized - false positive dilyan.palauzov at aegee dot org
@ 2015-05-03 13:28 ` trippels at gcc dot gnu.org
2015-05-03 13:54 ` dilyan.palauzov at aegee dot org
` (2 subsequent siblings)
3 siblings, 0 replies; 5+ messages in thread
From: trippels at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2015-05-03 13:28 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65991
Markus Trippelsdorf <trippels at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC| |trippels at gcc dot gnu.org
Resolution|--- |INVALID
--- Comment #1 from Markus Trippelsdorf <trippels at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
If you use custom CFLAGS when building binutils then configure with:
--disable-werror.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* [Bug lto/65991] maybe-unitialized - false positive
2015-05-03 13:23 [Bug lto/65991] New: maybe-unitialized - false positive dilyan.palauzov at aegee dot org
2015-05-03 13:28 ` [Bug lto/65991] " trippels at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2015-05-03 13:54 ` dilyan.palauzov at aegee dot org
2015-05-06 12:31 ` trippels at gcc dot gnu.org
2015-07-07 9:20 ` dilyan.palauzov at aegee dot org
3 siblings, 0 replies; 5+ messages in thread
From: dilyan.palauzov at aegee dot org @ 2015-05-03 13:54 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65991
Дилян Палаузов <dilyan.palauzov at aegee dot org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|RESOLVED |UNCONFIRMED
Resolution|INVALID |---
--- Comment #2 from Дилян Палаузов <dilyan.palauzov at aegee dot org> ---
Despite the custom CFLAGS used when building binutils, there is false positive
LTO warning.
>From gcc-bugs-return-485289-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Sun May 03 14:09:11 2015
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-485289-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 94677 invoked by alias); 3 May 2015 14:09:11 -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 94646 invoked by uid 48); 3 May 2015 14:09:06 -0000
From: "trippels at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug lto/65991] maybe-unitialized - false positive
Date: Sun, 03 May 2015 14:09:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: lto
X-Bugzilla-Version: 4.9.2
X-Bugzilla-Keywords:
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: trippels 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: bug_status cf_reconfirmed_on everconfirmed
Message-ID: <bug-65991-4-CQKXhAqM9M@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-65991-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-65991-4@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: 2015-05/txt/msg00129.txt.bz2
Content-length: 947
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65991
Markus Trippelsdorf <trippels at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed| |2015-05-03
Ever confirmed|0 |1
--- Comment #3 from Markus Trippelsdorf <trippels at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to Дилян Палаузов from comment #2)
> Despite the custom CFLAGS used when building binutils, there is false
> positive LTO warning.
Well, first of all, please attach a small testcase as per
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugs.
And also note the word "maybe" in the warning. False positives are expected.
And finally this almost certainly a dup.
(Search existing bugs before opening new ones)
>From gcc-bugs-return-485290-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Sun May 03 14:29:05 2015
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-485290-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 36744 invoked by alias); 3 May 2015 14:29:04 -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 36096 invoked by uid 48); 3 May 2015 14:29:01 -0000
From: "howarth.at.gcc at gmail dot com" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug target/65931] [5/6 regression] dsymutil assertion failure building libgnat-5.dylib
Date: Sun, 03 May 2015 14:29:00 -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: 6.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: build
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: howarth.at.gcc at gmail dot com
X-Bugzilla-Status: NEW
X-Bugzilla-Resolution:
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: 5.2
X-Bugzilla-Flags:
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields:
Message-ID: <bug-65931-4-g6w0CkACPO@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-65931-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-65931-4@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: 2015-05/txt/msg00130.txt.bz2
Content-length: 330
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?ide931
--- Comment #4 from Jack Howarth <howarth.at.gcc at gmail dot com> ---
(In reply to Dominique d'Humieres from comment #2)
> I have already filed Bug ID# 20510039 and I am using dsymutil from Xcode 6.2.
Did you also upload a standalone test case as a reproducer in that radar?
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* [Bug lto/65991] maybe-unitialized - false positive
2015-05-03 13:23 [Bug lto/65991] New: maybe-unitialized - false positive dilyan.palauzov at aegee dot org
2015-05-03 13:28 ` [Bug lto/65991] " trippels at gcc dot gnu.org
2015-05-03 13:54 ` dilyan.palauzov at aegee dot org
@ 2015-05-06 12:31 ` trippels at gcc dot gnu.org
2015-07-07 9:20 ` dilyan.palauzov at aegee dot org
3 siblings, 0 replies; 5+ messages in thread
From: trippels at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2015-05-06 12:31 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65991
Markus Trippelsdorf <trippels at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolution|--- |INVALID
--- Comment #4 from Markus Trippelsdorf <trippels at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
No feedback. Closing.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* [Bug lto/65991] maybe-unitialized - false positive
2015-05-03 13:23 [Bug lto/65991] New: maybe-unitialized - false positive dilyan.palauzov at aegee dot org
` (2 preceding siblings ...)
2015-05-06 12:31 ` trippels at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2015-07-07 9:20 ` dilyan.palauzov at aegee dot org
3 siblings, 0 replies; 5+ messages in thread
From: dilyan.palauzov at aegee dot org @ 2015-07-07 9:20 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65991
--- Comment #5 from Дилян Палаузов <dilyan.palauzov at aegee dot org> ---
The problem does not appear anymore, since I upgraded gcc 4.9.2 -> 4.9.3 .
>From gcc-bugs-return-491631-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Tue Jul 07 10:07:55 2015
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-491631-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 60107 invoked by alias); 7 Jul 2015 10:07:55 -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 60017 invoked by uid 48); 7 Jul 2015 10:07:51 -0000
From: "xricht17 at stud dot fit.vutbr.cz" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug pch/14940] PCH largefile test fails on various platforms
Date: Tue, 07 Jul 2015 10:07:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: pch
X-Bugzilla-Version: 4.0.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: ice-on-valid-code
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: xricht17 at stud dot fit.vutbr.cz
X-Bugzilla-Status: NEW
X-Bugzilla-Resolution:
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P2
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: ---
X-Bugzilla-Flags:
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields:
Message-ID: <bug-14940-4-7SHbhLkMA9@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-14940-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-14940-4@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: 2015-07/txt/msg00521.txt.bz2
Content-length: 2023
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id\x14940
--- Comment #49 from Martin Richter <xricht17 at stud dot fit.vutbr.cz> ---
(In reply to Martin Richter from comment #47)
My apologies, that patch is incorrect - `VirtualAlloc` still uses
`pch_VA_max_size` instead of `size`.
Some discussion about this bug and the reasoning behind the patch can be found
here:
https://sourceforge.net/p/mingw-w64/bugs/382/
Now the correct patch:
diff --git a/gcc/config/i386/host-mingw32.c b/gcc/config/i386/host-mingw32.c
index aa17378..631d9c4 100644
--- a/gcc/config/i386/host-mingw32.c
+++ b/gcc/config/i386/host-mingw32.c
@@ -42,9 +42,6 @@ static size_t mingw32_gt_pch_alloc_granularity (void);
static inline void w32_error(const char*, const char*, int, const char*);
-/* FIXME: Is this big enough? */
-static const size_t pch_VA_max_size = 128 * 1024 * 1024;
-
/* Granularity for reserving address space. */
static size_t va_granularity = 0x10000;
@@ -86,9 +83,6 @@ static void *
mingw32_gt_pch_get_address (size_t size, int)
{
void* res;
- size = (size + va_granularity - 1) & ~(va_granularity - 1);
- if (size > pch_VA_max_size)
- return NULL;
/* FIXME: We let system determine base by setting first arg to NULL.
Allocating at top of available address space avoids unnecessary
@@ -98,7 +92,7 @@ mingw32_gt_pch_get_address (size_t size, int)
If we allocate at bottom we need to reserve the address as early
as possible and at the same point in each invocation. */
- res = VirtualAlloc (NULL, pch_VA_max_size,
+ res = VirtualAlloc (NULL, size,
MEM_RESERVE | MEM_TOP_DOWN,
PAGE_NOACCESS);
if (!res)
@@ -148,7 +142,7 @@ mingw32_gt_pch_use_address (void *addr, size_t size, int
fd,
/* Offset must be also be a multiple of allocation granularity for
this to work. We can't change the offset. */
- if ((offset & (va_granularity - 1)) != 0 || size > pch_VA_max_size)
+ if ((offset & (va_granularity - 1)) != 0)
return -1;
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2015-07-07 9:20 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2015-05-03 13:23 [Bug lto/65991] New: maybe-unitialized - false positive dilyan.palauzov at aegee dot org
2015-05-03 13:28 ` [Bug lto/65991] " trippels at gcc dot gnu.org
2015-05-03 13:54 ` dilyan.palauzov at aegee dot org
2015-05-06 12:31 ` trippels at gcc dot gnu.org
2015-07-07 9:20 ` dilyan.palauzov at aegee 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).