From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: by sourceware.org (Postfix, from userid 48)
 id 7991F385BF86; Sun, 22 Mar 2020 09:45:34 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 7991F385BF86
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gcc.gnu.org;
 s=default; t=1584870334;
 bh=dJcAcuqPab7/HlkvxXsCIZhGxIRFBK6IUSMN3bAtxLI=;
 h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From;
 b=oxvHxGoZ+Rr2opWm0STQEZXTvKc8byUUI/qvPOa454ZE0exgssTVsHLEEApR3+efb
 uWh5Q+nWjcIRC/J8ogm3vIojjPdF+KgxAejLs78Y7xrHSCGzIdwP8oUnWy5GRcYe2u
 62JIuJ8cctTsmgvL4MvMNl0B+FGTbg/K6Fa0h+fY=
From: "emil.fihlman at aalto dot fi" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug middle-end/93873] gcc or lto-wrapper does not consider
 individual bitfield values on static analysis and instead tests the whole
 value of all bitfield bits combined
Date: Sun, 22 Mar 2020 09:45:34 +0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: middle-end
X-Bugzilla-Version: 6.3.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: missed-optimization
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: emil.fihlman at aalto dot fi
X-Bugzilla-Status: UNCONFIRMED
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-93873-4-UDmf22SXox@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-93873-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-93873-4@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-BeenThere: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Gcc-bugs mailing list <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://gcc.gnu.org/mailman/options/gcc-bugs>,
 <mailto:gcc-bugs-request@gcc.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-request@gcc.gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://gcc.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gcc-bugs>,
 <mailto:gcc-bugs-request@gcc.gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 22 Mar 2020 09:45:34 -0000

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D93873

--- Comment #5 from Emil Fihlman <emil.fihlman at aalto dot fi> ---
If a free is behind a flag gcc and the allocation is also behind a flag, gcc
should not complain.=