From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: by sourceware.org (Postfix, from userid 48) id 4C74F3857C49; Wed, 30 Dec 2020 22:43:54 +0000 (GMT) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 4C74F3857C49 From: "msebor at gcc dot gnu.org" To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug middle-end/98484] missing -Wstringop-overflow on invalid accesses to the same object by distinct functions Date: Wed, 30 Dec 2020 22:43:54 +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: 11.0 X-Bugzilla-Keywords: diagnostic X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal X-Bugzilla-Who: msebor at gcc dot gnu.org 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: short_desc Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: 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 List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 30 Dec 2020 22:43:54 -0000 https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D98484 Martin Sebor changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Summary|missing -Wstringop-overflow |missing -Wstringop-overflow |on a multiply inlined calls |on invalid accesses to the |from system header |same object by distinct | |functions --- Comment #1 from Martin Sebor --- Actually, the warning is issued if the accessed object is different, so the false negative is most likely due to the TREE_NO_WARNING bit and not relate= d to inlining or system headers. It might be okay to issue just one warning for multiple invalid accesses to the same object in a single (out-of-line) function, but the suppression should probably be reset for each new (out-of-line) function.=