public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "msebor at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org> To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug tree-optimization/94655] [10 Regression] Implicit assignment operator triggers stringop-overflow warning since r10-5451-gef29b12cfbb4979a Date: Mon, 20 Apr 2020 16:57:17 +0000 [thread overview] Message-ID: <bug-94655-4-P9MRRvI3GL@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> (raw) In-Reply-To: <bug-94655-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94655 --- Comment #5 from Martin Sebor <msebor at gcc dot gnu.org> --- We want stores by user code to be diagnosed based on strict language rules (e.g., accessing a member via a reference to another member). To do that we either have to teach the middle end to avoid taking shortcuts that make the IL look like invalid user code, or be able to apply more permissive rules for stores synthesized by it. I assume the former is what you meant by "modify the &something.field into &MEM_REF[..., off]." My comment was in support of that because, provided the latter part actually meant "&MEM_REF[something, offsetoff (typeof (something), field)], it could be added to and subtracted from to obtain pointers to any other member of "something." (In contrast, &something.field + N is only valid for N <= sizeof something.field (flexible arrays aside)).
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-04-20 16:57 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 24+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top 2020-04-18 23:35 [Bug c++/94655] New: Implicit assignment operator triggers stringop-overflow warning drahflow at gmx dot de 2020-04-20 7:10 ` [Bug tree-optimization/94655] [10 Regression] " rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2020-04-20 7:24 ` [Bug tree-optimization/94655] [10 Regression] Implicit assignment operator triggers stringop-overflow warning since r10-5451-gef29b12cfbb4979a marxin at gcc dot gnu.org 2020-04-20 8:52 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2020-04-20 15:35 ` msebor at gcc dot gnu.org 2020-04-20 15:42 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2020-04-20 16:57 ` msebor at gcc dot gnu.org [this message] 2020-04-21 20:10 ` law at redhat dot com 2020-04-21 21:27 ` msebor at gcc dot gnu.org 2020-04-30 16:14 ` [Bug tree-optimization/94655] [10/11 " msebor at gcc dot gnu.org 2020-05-07 11:56 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2020-07-21 14:55 ` msebor at gcc dot gnu.org 2020-07-21 20:08 ` msebor at gcc dot gnu.org 2020-07-21 20:46 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org 2020-07-23 6:51 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2021-01-14 8:38 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2021-01-14 20:11 ` msebor at gcc dot gnu.org 2021-01-21 22:34 ` [Bug tree-optimization/94655] [10/11 Regression] -Wstringop-overflow on implicit string assignment with vectorized char store msebor at gcc dot gnu.org 2021-01-21 23:48 ` msebor at gcc dot gnu.org 2021-03-04 0:05 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org 2021-04-08 12:02 ` [Bug tree-optimization/94655] [10 " rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2022-03-17 19:54 ` msebor at gcc dot gnu.org 2022-06-28 10:40 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2023-07-07 8:49 ` 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-94655-4-P9MRRvI3GL@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: linkBe 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).