* [PATCH, PR67405, committed] Avoid NULL pointer dereference
@ 2015-09-01 15:04 Ilya Enkovich
2015-09-02 12:35 ` Richard Biener
0 siblings, 1 reply; 11+ messages in thread
From: Ilya Enkovich @ 2015-09-01 15:04 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-patches
Hi,
This fixes an ICE by adding a NULL check. Bootstrapped and regtested for x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu. Applied to trunk. Does this need to be ported to gcc-5-branch?
Thanks,
Ilya
--
gcc/
2015-09-01 Ilya Enkovich <enkovich.gnu@gmail.com>
PR target/67405
* tree-chkp.c (chkp_find_bound_slots_1): Add NULL check.
gcc/testsuite/
2015-09-01 Ilya Enkovich <enkovich.gnu@gmail.com>
PR target/67405
* g++.dg/pr67405.C: New test.
diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/pr67405.C b/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/pr67405.C
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..5055921
--- /dev/null
+++ b/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/pr67405.C
@@ -0,0 +1,11 @@
+// { dg-do compile }
+
+struct S
+{
+ S f; // { dg-error "incomplete type" }
+};
+
+void
+fn1 (S p1)
+{
+}
diff --git a/gcc/tree-chkp.c b/gcc/tree-chkp.c
index 8c1b48c..2489abb 100644
--- a/gcc/tree-chkp.c
+++ b/gcc/tree-chkp.c
@@ -1667,8 +1667,9 @@ chkp_find_bound_slots_1 (const_tree type, bitmap have_bound,
for (field = TYPE_FIELDS (type); field; field = DECL_CHAIN (field))
if (TREE_CODE (field) == FIELD_DECL)
{
- HOST_WIDE_INT field_offs
- = TREE_INT_CST_LOW (DECL_FIELD_BIT_OFFSET (field));
+ HOST_WIDE_INT field_offs = 0;
+ if (DECL_FIELD_BIT_OFFSET (field))
+ field_offs += TREE_INT_CST_LOW (DECL_FIELD_BIT_OFFSET (field));
if (DECL_FIELD_OFFSET (field))
field_offs += TREE_INT_CST_LOW (DECL_FIELD_OFFSET (field)) * 8;
chkp_find_bound_slots_1 (TREE_TYPE (field), have_bound,
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH, PR67405, committed] Avoid NULL pointer dereference
2015-09-01 15:04 [PATCH, PR67405, committed] Avoid NULL pointer dereference Ilya Enkovich
@ 2015-09-02 12:35 ` Richard Biener
2015-09-02 12:51 ` Ilya Enkovich
2015-09-07 12:48 ` Ilya Enkovich
0 siblings, 2 replies; 11+ messages in thread
From: Richard Biener @ 2015-09-02 12:35 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Ilya Enkovich; +Cc: GCC Patches
On Tue, Sep 1, 2015 at 5:03 PM, Ilya Enkovich <enkovich.gnu@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> This fixes an ICE by adding a NULL check. Bootstrapped and regtested for x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu. Applied to trunk. Does this need to be ported to gcc-5-branch?
>
> Thanks,
> Ilya
> --
> gcc/
>
> 2015-09-01 Ilya Enkovich <enkovich.gnu@gmail.com>
>
> PR target/67405
> * tree-chkp.c (chkp_find_bound_slots_1): Add NULL check.
>
> gcc/testsuite/
>
> 2015-09-01 Ilya Enkovich <enkovich.gnu@gmail.com>
>
> PR target/67405
> * g++.dg/pr67405.C: New test.
>
>
> diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/pr67405.C b/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/pr67405.C
> new file mode 100644
> index 0000000..5055921
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/pr67405.C
> @@ -0,0 +1,11 @@
> +// { dg-do compile }
> +
> +struct S
> +{
> + S f; // { dg-error "incomplete type" }
> +};
> +
> +void
> +fn1 (S p1)
> +{
> +}
> diff --git a/gcc/tree-chkp.c b/gcc/tree-chkp.c
> index 8c1b48c..2489abb 100644
> --- a/gcc/tree-chkp.c
> +++ b/gcc/tree-chkp.c
> @@ -1667,8 +1667,9 @@ chkp_find_bound_slots_1 (const_tree type, bitmap have_bound,
> for (field = TYPE_FIELDS (type); field; field = DECL_CHAIN (field))
> if (TREE_CODE (field) == FIELD_DECL)
> {
> - HOST_WIDE_INT field_offs
> - = TREE_INT_CST_LOW (DECL_FIELD_BIT_OFFSET (field));
> + HOST_WIDE_INT field_offs = 0;
> + if (DECL_FIELD_BIT_OFFSET (field))
DECL_FIELD_BIT_OFFSET should be never NULL. Whoever created that
FIELD_DECL created an invalid one.
Richard.
> + field_offs += TREE_INT_CST_LOW (DECL_FIELD_BIT_OFFSET (field));
> if (DECL_FIELD_OFFSET (field))
> field_offs += TREE_INT_CST_LOW (DECL_FIELD_OFFSET (field)) * 8;
> chkp_find_bound_slots_1 (TREE_TYPE (field), have_bound,
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH, PR67405, committed] Avoid NULL pointer dereference
2015-09-02 12:35 ` Richard Biener
@ 2015-09-02 12:51 ` Ilya Enkovich
2015-09-02 13:25 ` Richard Biener
2015-09-07 12:48 ` Ilya Enkovich
1 sibling, 1 reply; 11+ messages in thread
From: Ilya Enkovich @ 2015-09-02 12:51 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Richard Biener; +Cc: GCC Patches
2015-09-02 15:35 GMT+03:00 Richard Biener <richard.guenther@gmail.com>:
> On Tue, Sep 1, 2015 at 5:03 PM, Ilya Enkovich <enkovich.gnu@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> This fixes an ICE by adding a NULL check. Bootstrapped and regtested for x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu. Applied to trunk. Does this need to be ported to gcc-5-branch?
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Ilya
>> --
>> gcc/
>>
>> 2015-09-01 Ilya Enkovich <enkovich.gnu@gmail.com>
>>
>> PR target/67405
>> * tree-chkp.c (chkp_find_bound_slots_1): Add NULL check.
>>
>> gcc/testsuite/
>>
>> 2015-09-01 Ilya Enkovich <enkovich.gnu@gmail.com>
>>
>> PR target/67405
>> * g++.dg/pr67405.C: New test.
>>
>>
>> diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/pr67405.C b/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/pr67405.C
>> new file mode 100644
>> index 0000000..5055921
>> --- /dev/null
>> +++ b/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/pr67405.C
>> @@ -0,0 +1,11 @@
>> +// { dg-do compile }
>> +
>> +struct S
>> +{
>> + S f; // { dg-error "incomplete type" }
>> +};
>> +
>> +void
>> +fn1 (S p1)
>> +{
>> +}
>> diff --git a/gcc/tree-chkp.c b/gcc/tree-chkp.c
>> index 8c1b48c..2489abb 100644
>> --- a/gcc/tree-chkp.c
>> +++ b/gcc/tree-chkp.c
>> @@ -1667,8 +1667,9 @@ chkp_find_bound_slots_1 (const_tree type, bitmap have_bound,
>> for (field = TYPE_FIELDS (type); field; field = DECL_CHAIN (field))
>> if (TREE_CODE (field) == FIELD_DECL)
>> {
>> - HOST_WIDE_INT field_offs
>> - = TREE_INT_CST_LOW (DECL_FIELD_BIT_OFFSET (field));
>> + HOST_WIDE_INT field_offs = 0;
>> + if (DECL_FIELD_BIT_OFFSET (field))
>
> DECL_FIELD_BIT_OFFSET should be never NULL. Whoever created that
> FIELD_DECL created an invalid one.
I'll check where this decl comes from. Is there a proper checker to
add a NULL test for DECL_FIELD_BIT_OFFSET BTW?.
Thanks,
Ilya
>
> Richard.
>
>> + field_offs += TREE_INT_CST_LOW (DECL_FIELD_BIT_OFFSET (field));
>> if (DECL_FIELD_OFFSET (field))
>> field_offs += TREE_INT_CST_LOW (DECL_FIELD_OFFSET (field)) * 8;
>> chkp_find_bound_slots_1 (TREE_TYPE (field), have_bound,
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH, PR67405, committed] Avoid NULL pointer dereference
2015-09-02 12:51 ` Ilya Enkovich
@ 2015-09-02 13:25 ` Richard Biener
0 siblings, 0 replies; 11+ messages in thread
From: Richard Biener @ 2015-09-02 13:25 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Ilya Enkovich; +Cc: GCC Patches
On Wed, Sep 2, 2015 at 2:51 PM, Ilya Enkovich <enkovich.gnu@gmail.com> wrote:
> 2015-09-02 15:35 GMT+03:00 Richard Biener <richard.guenther@gmail.com>:
>> On Tue, Sep 1, 2015 at 5:03 PM, Ilya Enkovich <enkovich.gnu@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> This fixes an ICE by adding a NULL check. Bootstrapped and regtested for x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu. Applied to trunk. Does this need to be ported to gcc-5-branch?
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Ilya
>>> --
>>> gcc/
>>>
>>> 2015-09-01 Ilya Enkovich <enkovich.gnu@gmail.com>
>>>
>>> PR target/67405
>>> * tree-chkp.c (chkp_find_bound_slots_1): Add NULL check.
>>>
>>> gcc/testsuite/
>>>
>>> 2015-09-01 Ilya Enkovich <enkovich.gnu@gmail.com>
>>>
>>> PR target/67405
>>> * g++.dg/pr67405.C: New test.
>>>
>>>
>>> diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/pr67405.C b/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/pr67405.C
>>> new file mode 100644
>>> index 0000000..5055921
>>> --- /dev/null
>>> +++ b/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/pr67405.C
>>> @@ -0,0 +1,11 @@
>>> +// { dg-do compile }
>>> +
>>> +struct S
>>> +{
>>> + S f; // { dg-error "incomplete type" }
>>> +};
>>> +
>>> +void
>>> +fn1 (S p1)
>>> +{
>>> +}
>>> diff --git a/gcc/tree-chkp.c b/gcc/tree-chkp.c
>>> index 8c1b48c..2489abb 100644
>>> --- a/gcc/tree-chkp.c
>>> +++ b/gcc/tree-chkp.c
>>> @@ -1667,8 +1667,9 @@ chkp_find_bound_slots_1 (const_tree type, bitmap have_bound,
>>> for (field = TYPE_FIELDS (type); field; field = DECL_CHAIN (field))
>>> if (TREE_CODE (field) == FIELD_DECL)
>>> {
>>> - HOST_WIDE_INT field_offs
>>> - = TREE_INT_CST_LOW (DECL_FIELD_BIT_OFFSET (field));
>>> + HOST_WIDE_INT field_offs = 0;
>>> + if (DECL_FIELD_BIT_OFFSET (field))
>>
>> DECL_FIELD_BIT_OFFSET should be never NULL. Whoever created that
>> FIELD_DECL created an invalid one.
>
> I'll check where this decl comes from. Is there a proper checker to
> add a NULL test for DECL_FIELD_BIT_OFFSET BTW?.
The type verifier Honza added recently I guess.
Richard.
> Thanks,
> Ilya
>
>>
>> Richard.
>>
>>> + field_offs += TREE_INT_CST_LOW (DECL_FIELD_BIT_OFFSET (field));
>>> if (DECL_FIELD_OFFSET (field))
>>> field_offs += TREE_INT_CST_LOW (DECL_FIELD_OFFSET (field)) * 8;
>>> chkp_find_bound_slots_1 (TREE_TYPE (field), have_bound,
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH, PR67405, committed] Avoid NULL pointer dereference
2015-09-02 12:35 ` Richard Biener
2015-09-02 12:51 ` Ilya Enkovich
@ 2015-09-07 12:48 ` Ilya Enkovich
2015-09-13 14:46 ` Richard Biener
1 sibling, 1 reply; 11+ messages in thread
From: Ilya Enkovich @ 2015-09-07 12:48 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Richard Biener; +Cc: GCC Patches
2015-09-02 15:35 GMT+03:00 Richard Biener <richard.guenther@gmail.com>:
>
> DECL_FIELD_BIT_OFFSET should be never NULL. Whoever created that
> FIELD_DECL created an invalid one.
>
> Richard.
>
layout_class_type doesn't place fields with no type and thus we have
nothing for DECL_FIELD_BIT_OFFSET. We still continue compilation and
function parameters gimplification causes a call to
chkp_find_bound_slots_1 which tries to access. So probably I should
handle gracefully fields with error_mark_node as a type? Or we better
put something into DECL_FIELD_BIT_OFFSET (zero? error_mark_node?) for
such fields.
Ilya
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH, PR67405, committed] Avoid NULL pointer dereference
2015-09-07 12:48 ` Ilya Enkovich
@ 2015-09-13 14:46 ` Richard Biener
2015-09-15 9:30 ` Ilya Enkovich
0 siblings, 1 reply; 11+ messages in thread
From: Richard Biener @ 2015-09-13 14:46 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Ilya Enkovich; +Cc: GCC Patches
On Mon, Sep 7, 2015 at 2:39 PM, Ilya Enkovich <enkovich.gnu@gmail.com> wrote:
> 2015-09-02 15:35 GMT+03:00 Richard Biener <richard.guenther@gmail.com>:
>>
>> DECL_FIELD_BIT_OFFSET should be never NULL. Whoever created that
>> FIELD_DECL created an invalid one.
>>
>> Richard.
>>
>
> layout_class_type doesn't place fields with no type
Err - that's because fields should also have a type.
> and thus we have
> nothing for DECL_FIELD_BIT_OFFSET. We still continue compilation and
> function parameters gimplification causes a call to
> chkp_find_bound_slots_1 which tries to access. So probably I should
> handle gracefully fields with error_mark_node as a type? Or we better
> put something into DECL_FIELD_BIT_OFFSET (zero? error_mark_node?) for
> such fields.
>
> Ilya
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH, PR67405, committed] Avoid NULL pointer dereference
2015-09-13 14:46 ` Richard Biener
@ 2015-09-15 9:30 ` Ilya Enkovich
2015-09-15 10:34 ` Richard Biener
0 siblings, 1 reply; 11+ messages in thread
From: Ilya Enkovich @ 2015-09-15 9:30 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Richard Biener; +Cc: GCC Patches
2015-09-13 16:36 GMT+03:00 Richard Biener <richard.guenther@gmail.com>:
> On Mon, Sep 7, 2015 at 2:39 PM, Ilya Enkovich <enkovich.gnu@gmail.com> wrote:
>> 2015-09-02 15:35 GMT+03:00 Richard Biener <richard.guenther@gmail.com>:
>>>
>>> DECL_FIELD_BIT_OFFSET should be never NULL. Whoever created that
>>> FIELD_DECL created an invalid one.
>>>
>>> Richard.
>>>
>>
>> layout_class_type doesn't place fields with no type
>
> Err - that's because fields should also have a type.
Sure. But we are talking about a wrong code and still want to continue
compilation to some point even if some field misses a type. It means
everything possibly invoked at this stage should check type against
error_mark_node. Thus I need to handle it gracefully in
chkp_find_bound_slots I suppose.
Ilya
>
>> and thus we have
>> nothing for DECL_FIELD_BIT_OFFSET. We still continue compilation and
>> function parameters gimplification causes a call to
>> chkp_find_bound_slots_1 which tries to access. So probably I should
>> handle gracefully fields with error_mark_node as a type? Or we better
>> put something into DECL_FIELD_BIT_OFFSET (zero? error_mark_node?) for
>> such fields.
>>
>> Ilya
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH, PR67405, committed] Avoid NULL pointer dereference
2015-09-15 9:30 ` Ilya Enkovich
@ 2015-09-15 10:34 ` Richard Biener
2015-09-15 11:10 ` Ilya Enkovich
0 siblings, 1 reply; 11+ messages in thread
From: Richard Biener @ 2015-09-15 10:34 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Ilya Enkovich; +Cc: GCC Patches
On Tue, Sep 15, 2015 at 11:28 AM, Ilya Enkovich <enkovich.gnu@gmail.com> wrote:
> 2015-09-13 16:36 GMT+03:00 Richard Biener <richard.guenther@gmail.com>:
>> On Mon, Sep 7, 2015 at 2:39 PM, Ilya Enkovich <enkovich.gnu@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> 2015-09-02 15:35 GMT+03:00 Richard Biener <richard.guenther@gmail.com>:
>>>>
>>>> DECL_FIELD_BIT_OFFSET should be never NULL. Whoever created that
>>>> FIELD_DECL created an invalid one.
>>>>
>>>> Richard.
>>>>
>>>
>>> layout_class_type doesn't place fields with no type
>>
>> Err - that's because fields should also have a type.
>
> Sure. But we are talking about a wrong code and still want to continue
> compilation to some point even if some field misses a type. It means
> everything possibly invoked at this stage should check type against
> error_mark_node. Thus I need to handle it gracefully in
> chkp_find_bound_slots I suppose.
I see. I wonder why we even call chkp_find_bound_slots if seen_errors().
I suppose only recursing for COMPLETE_TYPE_P () would work?
Richard.
> Ilya
>
>>
>>> and thus we have
>>> nothing for DECL_FIELD_BIT_OFFSET. We still continue compilation and
>>> function parameters gimplification causes a call to
>>> chkp_find_bound_slots_1 which tries to access. So probably I should
>>> handle gracefully fields with error_mark_node as a type? Or we better
>>> put something into DECL_FIELD_BIT_OFFSET (zero? error_mark_node?) for
>>> such fields.
>>>
>>> Ilya
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH, PR67405, committed] Avoid NULL pointer dereference
2015-09-15 10:34 ` Richard Biener
@ 2015-09-15 11:10 ` Ilya Enkovich
2015-09-24 15:13 ` Ilya Enkovich
0 siblings, 1 reply; 11+ messages in thread
From: Ilya Enkovich @ 2015-09-15 11:10 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Richard Biener; +Cc: GCC Patches
2015-09-15 13:32 GMT+03:00 Richard Biener <richard.guenther@gmail.com>:
> On Tue, Sep 15, 2015 at 11:28 AM, Ilya Enkovich <enkovich.gnu@gmail.com> wrote:
>> 2015-09-13 16:36 GMT+03:00 Richard Biener <richard.guenther@gmail.com>:
>>> On Mon, Sep 7, 2015 at 2:39 PM, Ilya Enkovich <enkovich.gnu@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> 2015-09-02 15:35 GMT+03:00 Richard Biener <richard.guenther@gmail.com>:
>>>>>
>>>>> DECL_FIELD_BIT_OFFSET should be never NULL. Whoever created that
>>>>> FIELD_DECL created an invalid one.
>>>>>
>>>>> Richard.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> layout_class_type doesn't place fields with no type
>>>
>>> Err - that's because fields should also have a type.
>>
>> Sure. But we are talking about a wrong code and still want to continue
>> compilation to some point even if some field misses a type. It means
>> everything possibly invoked at this stage should check type against
>> error_mark_node. Thus I need to handle it gracefully in
>> chkp_find_bound_slots I suppose.
>
> I see. I wonder why we even call chkp_find_bound_slots if seen_errors().
Even with errors we still gimplify function. Function parameters
gimplification checks where parameters are passed to possibly copy
some of them. It triggers ix86_function_arg_advance which uses
chkp_find_bound_slots to skip required amount of bounds registers.
> I suppose only recursing for COMPLETE_TYPE_P () would work?
Yep, it should work. I'll rework my fix.
Thanks,
Ilya
>
> Richard.
>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH, PR67405, committed] Avoid NULL pointer dereference
2015-09-15 11:10 ` Ilya Enkovich
@ 2015-09-24 15:13 ` Ilya Enkovich
2015-09-24 15:18 ` Richard Biener
0 siblings, 1 reply; 11+ messages in thread
From: Ilya Enkovich @ 2015-09-24 15:13 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Richard Biener; +Cc: GCC Patches
2015-09-15 14:01 GMT+03:00 Ilya Enkovich <enkovich.gnu@gmail.com>:
> 2015-09-15 13:32 GMT+03:00 Richard Biener <richard.guenther@gmail.com>:
>> On Tue, Sep 15, 2015 at 11:28 AM, Ilya Enkovich <enkovich.gnu@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> I see. I wonder why we even call chkp_find_bound_slots if seen_errors().
>
> Even with errors we still gimplify function. Function parameters
> gimplification checks where parameters are passed to possibly copy
> some of them. It triggers ix86_function_arg_advance which uses
> chkp_find_bound_slots to skip required amount of bounds registers.
>
>> I suppose only recursing for COMPLETE_TYPE_P () would work?
>
> Yep, it should work. I'll rework my fix.
It turned out to be wrong. For this test
struct S
{
S f;
};
void fn1 (S p1) {}
Structure S is considered as complete (has size 8 for some reason) at
fn1 gimplification. Thus even with complete type check I still hit
this field with error_node instead of a type and NULL at
DECL_FIELD_BIT_OFFSET. Should my current fix be OK then?
Thanks,
Ilya
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH, PR67405, committed] Avoid NULL pointer dereference
2015-09-24 15:13 ` Ilya Enkovich
@ 2015-09-24 15:18 ` Richard Biener
0 siblings, 0 replies; 11+ messages in thread
From: Richard Biener @ 2015-09-24 15:18 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Ilya Enkovich; +Cc: GCC Patches
On Thu, Sep 24, 2015 at 4:07 PM, Ilya Enkovich <enkovich.gnu@gmail.com> wrote:
> 2015-09-15 14:01 GMT+03:00 Ilya Enkovich <enkovich.gnu@gmail.com>:
>> 2015-09-15 13:32 GMT+03:00 Richard Biener <richard.guenther@gmail.com>:
>>> On Tue, Sep 15, 2015 at 11:28 AM, Ilya Enkovich <enkovich.gnu@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> I see. I wonder why we even call chkp_find_bound_slots if seen_errors().
>>
>> Even with errors we still gimplify function. Function parameters
>> gimplification checks where parameters are passed to possibly copy
>> some of them. It triggers ix86_function_arg_advance which uses
>> chkp_find_bound_slots to skip required amount of bounds registers.
>>
>>> I suppose only recursing for COMPLETE_TYPE_P () would work?
>>
>> Yep, it should work. I'll rework my fix.
>
> It turned out to be wrong. For this test
>
> struct S
> {
> S f;
> };
>
> void fn1 (S p1) {}
>
> Structure S is considered as complete (has size 8 for some reason) at
> fn1 gimplification. Thus even with complete type check I still hit
> this field with error_node instead of a type and NULL at
> DECL_FIELD_BIT_OFFSET. Should my current fix be OK then?
What's the current fix again? The NULL check on DECL_FIELD_BIT_OFFSET?
I still don't like that. The frontend should leave us with something
easier here :/
And I wonder if we really need to gimplify when we've seen errors (yeah, we'll
get more diagnostics but also ICE-after-errors like this).
Richard.
> Thanks,
> Ilya
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2015-09-24 14:18 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2015-09-01 15:04 [PATCH, PR67405, committed] Avoid NULL pointer dereference Ilya Enkovich
2015-09-02 12:35 ` Richard Biener
2015-09-02 12:51 ` Ilya Enkovich
2015-09-02 13:25 ` Richard Biener
2015-09-07 12:48 ` Ilya Enkovich
2015-09-13 14:46 ` Richard Biener
2015-09-15 9:30 ` Ilya Enkovich
2015-09-15 10:34 ` Richard Biener
2015-09-15 11:10 ` Ilya Enkovich
2015-09-24 15:13 ` Ilya Enkovich
2015-09-24 15:18 ` Richard Biener
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).