From: Paul Eggert <eggert@cs.ucla.edu>
To: Martin Sebor <msebor@gmail.com>
Cc: libc-alpha@sourceware.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] avoid -Wuse-after-free [BZ #26779]
Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2022 16:42:12 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <e55d3e28-74b0-3b65-ae9b-ea6356a05b36@cs.ucla.edu> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <6c44a5a2-ed1e-abfe-2ead-9ddb6a97b8fc@gmail.com>
On 1/21/22 15:14, Martin Sebor wrote:
>>
>
> That does look cleaner although it wasn't entirely obvious to me
> from looking at the code that it's the same. Unfortunately, it
> doesn't help. GCC replaces the bool variable with the equality
> test of the two pointers, and the warning points that out.
That's a GCC bug.
> Pedantically speaking it's a bug in GCC that it does that but
> I doubt anyone would care to do anything about it.
You might be surprised; they do fix bugs in this area. If I could
reproduce the bug I'd file a bug report, but my GCC doesn't complain so
I guess it's up to you....
> his only
> happens at level 3 (i.e., above the default 2), so if you want
> a clean build at that level you can either take the patch as is
> or use #pragma GCC diagnostic to suppress the warning. Otherwise,
> if all you care about is -Wall, then you can drop this part of
> the patch.
We shouldn't drop the patch or use a pragma, since this is a genuine bug
in glibc that should get fixed. If the only option is to use the patch
as-is then let's do that. Though I do wish the GCC bug were fixed.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-01-22 0:42 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 32+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-01-16 0:21 Martin Sebor
2022-01-16 2:25 ` Paul Eggert
2022-01-21 23:14 ` Martin Sebor
2022-01-22 0:42 ` Paul Eggert [this message]
2022-01-25 0:42 ` Martin Sebor
2022-01-25 1:08 ` Jeff Law
2022-01-18 9:48 ` Florian Weimer
2022-01-20 21:50 ` Martin Sebor
2022-01-25 0:52 ` [PATCH v2 0/5] " Martin Sebor
2022-01-25 0:57 ` [PATCH v2 1/5] " Martin Sebor
2022-01-25 17:46 ` Carlos O'Donell
2022-01-25 0:58 ` [PATCH v2 2/5] " Martin Sebor
2022-01-25 17:46 ` Carlos O'Donell
2022-01-25 0:58 ` [PATCH v2 3/5] " Martin Sebor
2022-01-25 17:47 ` Carlos O'Donell
2022-01-25 0:58 ` [PATCH v2 4/5] " Martin Sebor
2022-01-25 17:49 ` Carlos O'Donell
2022-01-25 17:51 ` Carlos O'Donell
2022-01-25 21:47 ` Florian Weimer
2022-01-26 13:55 ` Carlos O'Donell
2022-01-25 0:58 ` [PATCH v2 5/5] " Martin Sebor
2022-01-25 17:49 ` Carlos O'Donell
2022-01-25 22:50 ` [PATCH v3 " Martin Sebor
2022-01-26 14:56 ` Carlos O'Donell
2022-01-28 13:10 ` Joseph Myers
2022-01-28 17:33 ` Carlos O'Donell
2022-01-28 17:51 ` Joseph Myers
2022-01-28 23:21 ` Jeff Law
2022-01-31 15:12 ` Carlos O'Donell
2022-02-04 20:40 ` Joseph Myers
2022-01-25 17:46 ` [PATCH v2 0/5] " Carlos O'Donell
2022-01-26 3:08 ` Martin Sebor
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=e55d3e28-74b0-3b65-ae9b-ea6356a05b36@cs.ucla.edu \
--to=eggert@cs.ucla.edu \
--cc=libc-alpha@sourceware.org \
--cc=msebor@gmail.com \
/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).