public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "jakub at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug tree-optimization/95663] static_cast checks for null even when the pointer is dereferenced
Date: Mon, 15 Jun 2020 13:32:22 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <bug-95663-4-Pkj0Ea5IOS@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <bug-95663-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95663
Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #9 from Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to rguenther@suse.de from comment #8)
> -fdelete-null-pointer-checks optimizes NULL pointer checks _after_ a
> dereference. This case is first checking and then dereferencing.
> GCC sees
-fdelete-null-pointer-checks is just an option that says that it is ok to
optimize null pointer dereferences.
So, I don't see why we couldn't optimize this out.
-fisolate-erroneous-paths-dereference is documented to add __builtin_trap in
there instead of __builtin_unreachable, I'd say we want (by default) something
that will add __builtin_unreachable in those cases instead.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-06-15 13:32 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 23+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-06-13 10:52 [Bug c++/95663] New: " jzwinck at gmail dot com
2020-06-15 6:47 ` [Bug tree-optimization/95663] " rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2020-06-15 10:04 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org
2020-06-15 10:09 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org
2020-06-15 11:46 ` jzwinck at gmail dot com
2020-06-15 12:50 ` rguenther at suse dot de
2020-06-15 12:53 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org
2020-06-15 12:54 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org
2020-06-15 13:03 ` rguenther at suse dot de
2020-06-15 13:32 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org [this message]
2020-06-26 22:18 ` law at redhat dot com
2020-06-27 0:20 ` jzwinck at gmail dot com
2020-06-27 11:49 ` glisse at gcc dot gnu.org
2020-06-27 15:36 ` law at redhat dot com
2020-06-27 15:40 ` law at redhat dot com
2020-06-27 15:57 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-01-07 13:13 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-01-07 13:14 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-01-07 20:00 ` law at redhat dot com
2021-12-13 11:05 ` hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-12-13 11:10 ` hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-12-13 15:51 ` law at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-01-03 9:54 ` rguenther at suse dot de
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-95663-4-Pkj0Ea5IOS@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: link
Be 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).