[Bug c++/67409] New: tree-cfg.c dereferences a NULL pointer

[Bug c++/67409] New: tree-cfg.c dereferences a NULL pointer

[zeccav at gmail dot com]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67409

            Bug ID: 67409
           Summary: tree-cfg.c dereferences a NULL pointer
           Product: gcc
           Version: 5.2.0
            Status: UNCONFIRMED
          Severity: normal
          Priority: P3
         Component: c++
          Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
          Reporter: zeccav at gmail dot com
  Target Milestone: ---

//g++ 5.2.0 sanitizer detects dereferencing a NULL pointer 
//gcc-5.2.0/gcc/tree-cfg.c:1342:38: runtime error: member access within null
pointer of type 'struct basic_block_def'
//must be compiled with -fpermissive
//pointer bb is null
//source line "tree main_label = label_for_bb[bb->index].label;"
//double check with "gcc_assert(bb);" immediately before
//Target: x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu
void f()
try
  {
    goto l2;
  } catch (...)
  {
  l2:;
  }

[Bug middle-end/67409] tree-cfg.c dereferences a NULL pointer

[mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67409

Marek Polacek <mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|UNCONFIRMED                 |NEW
   Last reconfirmed|                            |2015-08-31
                 CC|                            |mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
          Component|c++                         |middle-end
     Ever confirmed|0                           |1

--- Comment #1 from Marek Polacek <mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Confirmed even with trunk.

[Bug middle-end/67409] [5/6 Regression] tree-cfg.c dereferences a NULL pointer

[rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67409

Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
           Keywords|                            |accepts-invalid
      Known to work|                            |4.9.3
   Target Milestone|---                         |5.3
            Summary|tree-cfg.c dereferences a   |[5/6 Regression] tree-cfg.c
                   |NULL pointer                |dereferences a NULL pointer

--- Comment #2 from Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
> g++-4.9 -fpermissive -S t.ii
t.ii: In function ‘void f()’:
t.ii:7: warning: jump to label ‘l2’
t.ii:4: warning:   from here
t.ii:7: error:   enters catch block

so that we allow this with -fpermissive is new and possibly not a good idea
as seen from the crash.
>From gcc-bugs-return-496037-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Tue Sep 01 08:40:57 2015
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-496037-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 60435 invoked by alias); 1 Sep 2015 08:40:57 -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 60371 invoked by uid 48); 1 Sep 2015 08:40:52 -0000
From: "paolo.carlini at oracle dot com" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug c++/61753] poor diagnostic for constructor definition that starts with 'const'
Date: Tue, 01 Sep 2015 08:40:00 -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: 4.7.2
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: diagnostic
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: paolo.carlini at oracle dot com
X-Bugzilla-Status: RESOLVED
X-Bugzilla-Resolution: FIXED
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: 6.0
X-Bugzilla-Flags:
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: bug_status resolution assigned_to target_milestone
Message-ID: <bug-61753-4-mhLOn5eVvu@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-61753-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-61753-4@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: 2015-09/txt/msg00015.txt.bz2
Content-length: 575

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?ida753

Paolo Carlini <paolo.carlini at oracle dot com> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|ASSIGNED                    |RESOLVED
         Resolution|---                         |FIXED
           Assignee|paolo.carlini at oracle dot com    |unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
   Target Milestone|---                         |6.0

--- Comment #6 from Paolo Carlini <paolo.carlini at oracle dot com> ---
Fixed.

[Bug middle-end/67409] [5/6 Regression] tree-cfg.c dereferences a NULL pointer

[mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67409

--- Comment #3 from Marek Polacek <mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
We stopped rejecting the code in r218328.

[Bug c++/67409] [5/6 Regression] tree-cfg.c dereferences a NULL pointer

[mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67409

Marek Polacek <mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |paolo at gcc dot gnu.org
          Component|middle-end                  |c++

--- Comment #4 from Marek Polacek <mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
I think back to the c++ component.

[Bug c++/67409] [5/6 Regression] tree-cfg.c dereferences a NULL pointer

[paolo.carlini at oracle dot com]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67409

Paolo Carlini <paolo.carlini at oracle dot com> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|paolo at gcc dot gnu.org           |

--- Comment #5 from Paolo Carlini <paolo.carlini at oracle dot com> ---
To clarify: pre-r218328 we didn't have a consistent status to which we may want
to return: we had permerrors and then unconditional errors as part of the
*explanations* (inform) of the permerrors. If we want unconditional errors
instead of permerrors in some of those cases, it's certainly a different (easy)
issue, just matter of going through all those we have and deciding which (we
can also simplify a bit the code, the following informs are unconditional)