public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug middle-end/95903] gcc 10: wrong code with -fwrapv
Date: Wed, 16 Sep 2020 19:22:27 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <bug-95903-4-vQ73eii0cp@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <bug-95903-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95903

--- Comment #12 from CVS Commits <cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
The releases/gcc-9 branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek
<jakub@gcc.gnu.org>:

https://gcc.gnu.org/g:a1eb6e41832816b671d3b945014f7e8255167470

commit r9-8902-ga1eb6e41832816b671d3b945014f7e8255167470
Author: Jakub Jelinek <jakub@redhat.com>
Date:   Sat Jun 27 12:38:23 2020 +0200

    c-family: Use TYPE_OVERFLOW_UNDEFINED instead of !TYPE_UNSIGNED in
pointer_sum [PR95903]

    For lp64 targets and int off ... ptr[off + 1]
    is lowered in pointer_sum to *(ptr + ((sizetype) off + (sizetype) 1)).
    That is fine when signed integer wrapping is undefined (and is not done
    already if off has unsigned type), but changes behavior for -fwrapv, where
    overflow is well defined.  Runtime test could be:
    int
    main ()
    {
      char *p = __builtin_malloc (0x100000000UL);
      if (!p) return 0;
      char *q = p + 0x80000000UL;
      int o = __INT_MAX__;
      q[o + 1] = 1;
      if (q[-__INT_MAX__ - 1] != 1) __builtin_abort ();
      return 0;
    }
    with -fwrapv or so, not included in the testsuite because it requires 4GB
    allocation (with some other test it would be enough to have something
    slightly above 2GB, but still...).

    2020-06-27  Jakub Jelinek  <jakub@redhat.com>

            PR middle-end/95903
    gcc/c-family/
            * c-common.c (pointer_int_sum): Use TYPE_OVERFLOW_UNDEFINED instead
of
            !TYPE_UNSIGNED check to see if we can apply distributive law and
handle
            smaller precision intop operands separately.
    gcc/testsuite/
            * c-c++-common/pr95903.c: New test.

    (cherry picked from commit 37995960984ea2222346dd9d168d332cd6f7adf0)

  parent reply	other threads:[~2020-09-16 19:22 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2020-06-25 23:25 [Bug middle-end/95903] New: " markus at oberhumer dot com
2020-06-26  6:30 ` [Bug middle-end/95903] " jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2020-06-26  7:41 ` markus at oberhumer dot com
2020-06-26  8:05 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2020-06-26  8:35 ` markus at oberhumer dot com
2020-06-26  8:56 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2020-06-26 10:38 ` markus at oberhumer dot com
2020-06-26 11:03 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2020-06-26 11:17 ` markus at oberhumer dot com
2020-06-26 11:36 ` markus at oberhumer dot com
2020-06-27 10:42 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org
2020-06-29  9:35 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org
2020-09-16 19:22 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org [this message]
2020-09-17 17:55 ` jakub 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-95903-4-vQ73eii0cp@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).