* [Bug c/84919] [8/9 Regression] error: passing argument 1 to restrict-qualified parameter aliases with argument 5 [-Werror=restrict]
[not found] <bug-84919-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
@ 2020-03-12 11:58 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2020-03-13 3:26 ` egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
` (9 subsequent siblings)
10 siblings, 0 replies; 11+ messages in thread
From: jakub at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2020-03-12 11:58 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84919
Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Target Milestone|9.3 |9.4
--- Comment #21 from Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
GCC 9.3.0 has been released, adjusting target milestone.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread* [Bug c/84919] [8/9 Regression] error: passing argument 1 to restrict-qualified parameter aliases with argument 5 [-Werror=restrict]
[not found] <bug-84919-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
2020-03-12 11:58 ` [Bug c/84919] [8/9 Regression] error: passing argument 1 to restrict-qualified parameter aliases with argument 5 [-Werror=restrict] jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2020-03-13 3:26 ` egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
2020-03-13 14:36 ` msebor at gcc dot gnu.org
` (8 subsequent siblings)
10 siblings, 0 replies; 11+ messages in thread
From: egallager at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2020-03-13 3:26 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84919
Eric Gallager <egallager at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #22 from Eric Gallager <egallager at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to Martin Sebor from comment #20)
> Fixed on trunk (GCC 10). The fix cannot be backported on its own without
> introducing false negatives.
so... if it can't be backported... then does this bug need to stay open?
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread* [Bug c/84919] [8/9 Regression] error: passing argument 1 to restrict-qualified parameter aliases with argument 5 [-Werror=restrict]
[not found] <bug-84919-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
2020-03-12 11:58 ` [Bug c/84919] [8/9 Regression] error: passing argument 1 to restrict-qualified parameter aliases with argument 5 [-Werror=restrict] jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2020-03-13 3:26 ` egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2020-03-13 14:36 ` msebor at gcc dot gnu.org
2020-03-15 3:20 ` egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
` (7 subsequent siblings)
10 siblings, 0 replies; 11+ messages in thread
From: msebor at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2020-03-13 14:36 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84919
--- Comment #23 from Martin Sebor <msebor at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
I think that's a question for the release managers. I thought they like to
keep regressions open until all the affected branches have closed, but I could
be wrong. One way to find out is to close it and let them reopen it :)
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread* [Bug c/84919] [8/9 Regression] error: passing argument 1 to restrict-qualified parameter aliases with argument 5 [-Werror=restrict]
[not found] <bug-84919-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
` (2 preceding siblings ...)
2020-03-13 14:36 ` msebor at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2020-03-15 3:20 ` egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
2020-08-20 12:38 ` marietto2008 at gmail dot com
` (6 subsequent siblings)
10 siblings, 0 replies; 11+ messages in thread
From: egallager at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2020-03-15 3:20 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84919
Eric Gallager <egallager at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Known to work| |10.0
Known to fail| |9.3.0
Target Milestone|9.4 |10.0
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
--- Comment #24 from Eric Gallager <egallager at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to Martin Sebor from comment #23)
> I think that's a question for the release managers. I thought they like to
> keep regressions open until all the affected branches have closed, but I
> could be wrong. One way to find out is to close it and let them reopen it :)
ok, I'll do that
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread* [Bug c/84919] [8/9 Regression] error: passing argument 1 to restrict-qualified parameter aliases with argument 5 [-Werror=restrict]
[not found] <bug-84919-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
` (3 preceding siblings ...)
2020-03-15 3:20 ` egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2020-08-20 12:38 ` marietto2008 at gmail dot com
2020-08-20 12:42 ` marietto2008 at gmail dot com
` (5 subsequent siblings)
10 siblings, 0 replies; 11+ messages in thread
From: marietto2008 at gmail dot com @ 2020-08-20 12:38 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84919
Marietto <marietto2008 at gmail dot com> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |marietto2008 at gmail dot com
--- Comment #25 from Marietto <marietto2008 at gmail dot com> ---
Hello.
I'm trying to configure and compile GVT-g to enable the passthrough of the
integrated GPU that I have on my motherboard,the model "Intel Corporation UHD
Graphics 630 (Desktop 9 Series) (rev 02)". This is the tutorial that I'm
following :
https://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/intel-gvt-dev/2017-June/001238.html
I reached this point and then the compilation stopped for an error that it
seems to be the same as this.
root@ziomario-z390aoruspro:/etc/xen/gvt-linux# make
CHK include/config/kernel.release
CHK include/generated/uapi/linux/version.h
CHK include/generated/utsrelease.h
CHK include/generated/timeconst.h
CHK include/generated/bounds.h
CHK include/generated/asm-offsets.h
CALL scripts/checksyscalls.sh
DESCEND objtool
CC /etc/xen/gvt-linux/tools/objtool/pager.o
CC /etc/xen/gvt-linux/tools/objtool/parse-options.o
CC /etc/xen/gvt-linux/tools/objtool/run-command.o
CC /etc/xen/gvt-linux/tools/objtool/sigchain.o
CC /etc/xen/gvt-linux/tools/objtool/subcmd-config.o
LD /etc/xen/gvt-linux/tools/objtool/libsubcmd-in.o
AR /etc/xen/gvt-linux/tools/objtool/libsubcmd.a
GEN /etc/xen/gvt-linux/tools/objtool/arch/x86/insn/inat-tables.c
CC /etc/xen/gvt-linux/tools/objtool/arch/x86/decode.o
LD /etc/xen/gvt-linux/tools/objtool/arch/x86/objtool-in.o
CC /etc/xen/gvt-linux/tools/objtool/builtin-check.o
CC /etc/xen/gvt-linux/tools/objtool/elf.o
CC /etc/xen/gvt-linux/tools/objtool/special.o
CC /etc/xen/gvt-linux/tools/objtool/objtool.o
CC /etc/xen/gvt-linux/tools/objtool/libstring.o
CC /etc/xen/gvt-linux/tools/objtool/str_error_r.o
../lib/str_error_r.c: In function ‘str_error_r’:
../lib/str_error_r.c:24:3: error: passing argument 1 to restrict-qualified
parameter aliases with argument 5 [-Werror=restrict]
24 | snprintf(buf, buflen, "INTERNAL ERROR: strerror_r(%d, %p, %zd)=%d",
errnum, buf, buflen, err);
| ^~~~~~~~
cc1: all warnings being treated as errors
mv: impossibile eseguire stat di
'/etc/xen/gvt-linux/tools/objtool/.str_error_r.o.tmp': File o directory non
esistente
make[3]: *** [Build:18: /etc/xen/gvt-linux/tools/objtool/str_error_r.o] Errore
1
make[2]: *** [Makefile:40: /etc/xen/gvt-linux/tools/objtool/objtool-in.o]
Errore 2
make[1]: *** [Makefile:61: objtool] Errore 2
make: *** [Makefile:1616: tools/objtool] Errore 2
I don't understand where is the patch ?
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread* [Bug c/84919] [8/9 Regression] error: passing argument 1 to restrict-qualified parameter aliases with argument 5 [-Werror=restrict]
[not found] <bug-84919-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
` (4 preceding siblings ...)
2020-08-20 12:38 ` marietto2008 at gmail dot com
@ 2020-08-20 12:42 ` marietto2008 at gmail dot com
2020-08-20 14:40 ` msebor at gcc dot gnu.org
` (4 subsequent siblings)
10 siblings, 0 replies; 11+ messages in thread
From: marietto2008 at gmail dot com @ 2020-08-20 12:42 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84919
--- Comment #26 from Marietto <marietto2008 at gmail dot com> ---
I'm using ubuntu 20.04 and gcc 9.3
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread* [Bug c/84919] [8/9 Regression] error: passing argument 1 to restrict-qualified parameter aliases with argument 5 [-Werror=restrict]
[not found] <bug-84919-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
` (5 preceding siblings ...)
2020-08-20 12:42 ` marietto2008 at gmail dot com
@ 2020-08-20 14:40 ` msebor at gcc dot gnu.org
2020-08-20 22:56 ` marietto2008 at gmail dot com
` (3 subsequent siblings)
10 siblings, 0 replies; 11+ messages in thread
From: msebor at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2020-08-20 14:40 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84919
--- Comment #27 from Martin Sebor <msebor at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
The fix was applied to GCC 10 but not to GCC 9 or 8. It will not be backported
there. It can be suppressed by introducing a named temporary copy of the
pointer and using it as one other other argument to the function.
void f (char *p)
{
char *q = p;
sprintf (p, "%p", q);
}
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread* [Bug c/84919] [8/9 Regression] error: passing argument 1 to restrict-qualified parameter aliases with argument 5 [-Werror=restrict]
[not found] <bug-84919-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
` (6 preceding siblings ...)
2020-08-20 14:40 ` msebor at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2020-08-20 22:56 ` marietto2008 at gmail dot com
2020-08-20 23:27 ` marietto2008 at gmail dot com
` (2 subsequent siblings)
10 siblings, 0 replies; 11+ messages in thread
From: marietto2008 at gmail dot com @ 2020-08-20 22:56 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84919
--- Comment #28 from Marietto <marietto2008 at gmail dot com> ---
I'm not a coder. can u explain to me carefully what should I do ? thanks.
Il giorno gio 20 ago 2020 alle ore 16:40 msebor at gcc dot gnu.org <
gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org> ha scritto:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84919
>
> --- Comment #27 from Martin Sebor <msebor at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
> The fix was applied to GCC 10 but not to GCC 9 or 8. It will not be
> backported
> there. It can be suppressed by introducing a named temporary copy of the
> pointer and using it as one other other argument to the function.
>
> void f (char *p)
> {
> char *q = p;
> sprintf (p, "%p", q);
> }
>
> --
> You are receiving this mail because:
> You are on the CC list for the bug.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread* [Bug c/84919] [8/9 Regression] error: passing argument 1 to restrict-qualified parameter aliases with argument 5 [-Werror=restrict]
[not found] <bug-84919-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
` (7 preceding siblings ...)
2020-08-20 22:56 ` marietto2008 at gmail dot com
@ 2020-08-20 23:27 ` marietto2008 at gmail dot com
2020-08-20 23:47 ` msebor at gcc dot gnu.org
2020-08-20 23:50 ` marietto2008 at gmail dot com
10 siblings, 0 replies; 11+ messages in thread
From: marietto2008 at gmail dot com @ 2020-08-20 23:27 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84919
--- Comment #29 from Marietto <marietto2008 at gmail dot com> ---
I get this error :
gcc -m64 -DBUILD_ID -fno-strict-aliasing -std=gnu99 -Wall -Wstrict-prototypes
-Wdeclaration-after-statement -Wno-unused-but-set-variable
-Wno-unused-local-typedefs -O2 -fomit-frame-pointer -nostdinc -fno-builtin
-fno-common -Werror -Wredundant-decls -Wno-pointer-arith -pipe -g -D__XEN__
-include /etc/xen/igvtg-xen/xen/include/xen/config.h
'-D__OBJECT_FILE__="trace.o"' -Wa,--strip-local-absolute -MMD -MF ./.trace.o.d
-I/etc/xen/igvtg-xen/xen/include
-I/etc/xen/igvtg-xen/xen/include/asm-x86/mach-generic
-I/etc/xen/igvtg-xen/xen/include/asm-x86/mach-default -DXEN_IMG_OFFSET=0x200000
'-D__OBJECT_LABEL__=common$trace.o' -msoft-float -fno-stack-protector
-fno-exceptions -Wnested-externs -DHAVE_GAS_VMX -DHAVE_GAS_SSE4_2
-DHAVE_GAS_EPT -DHAVE_GAS_RDRAND -DHAVE_GAS_FSGSBASE -DHAVE_GAS_RDSEED
-U__OBJECT_LABEL__ -DHAVE_GAS_QUOTED_SYM '-D__OBJECT_LABEL__=common/trace.o'
-mno-red-zone -mno-sse -fpic -fno-asynchronous-unwind-tables
-DGCC_HAS_VISIBILITY_ATTRIBUTE -c trace.c -o trace.o
trace.c: In function ‘__trace_hypercall’:
trace.c:829:19: error: taking address of packed member of ‘struct ’ may result
in an unaligned pointer value [-Werror=address-of-packed-member]
829 | uint32_t *a = d.args;
| ^
cc1: all warnings being treated as errors
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread* [Bug c/84919] [8/9 Regression] error: passing argument 1 to restrict-qualified parameter aliases with argument 5 [-Werror=restrict]
[not found] <bug-84919-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
` (8 preceding siblings ...)
2020-08-20 23:27 ` marietto2008 at gmail dot com
@ 2020-08-20 23:47 ` msebor at gcc dot gnu.org
2020-08-20 23:50 ` marietto2008 at gmail dot com
10 siblings, 0 replies; 11+ messages in thread
From: msebor at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2020-08-20 23:47 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84919
--- Comment #30 from Martin Sebor <msebor at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to Marietto from comment #28)
> I'm not a coder. can u explain to me carefully what should I do ? thanks.
Usually packages provide a mechanism to prevent compiler warnings from causing
errors (by avoiding -Werror). I don't know how this one does it. I'd try
adding WERROR=0 to the invocation of the command you are using to build it.
The link is a diff from a Wiki edit, not a guide. This also isn't the right
place to get help with third party software. I'd talk to the Intel GVT-g
developers.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread* [Bug c/84919] [8/9 Regression] error: passing argument 1 to restrict-qualified parameter aliases with argument 5 [-Werror=restrict]
[not found] <bug-84919-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
` (9 preceding siblings ...)
2020-08-20 23:47 ` msebor at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2020-08-20 23:50 ` marietto2008 at gmail dot com
10 siblings, 0 replies; 11+ messages in thread
From: marietto2008 at gmail dot com @ 2020-08-20 23:50 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84919
--- Comment #31 from Marietto <marietto2008 at gmail dot com> ---
they don't reply to messages and they don't fix old bugs. And new users aren't
interested to use xen anymore. So,it's a waste of time.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread