On Thu, Mar 10, 2011 at 4:57 PM, Jakub Jelinek <ja...@redhat.com> wrote: > On Thu, Mar 10, 2011 at 04:48:48PM +0100, Uros Bizjak wrote: >> > Are you sure? Making the vars static enables folding the zero >> > initialization. >> >> I was looking at other similar testcases (snprintf-chk.c, >> vsprintf-chk.c), where uninitialized buffer is declared as static (and >> it didn't fail lto tests). Anyway, let's ask the author of the test >> (CC'd). > > The tests weren't written with LTO in mind, after all LTO wasn't supported > by GCC at that point. But I agree with Richard, we shouldn't working around > buggy ld in the gcc testsuite, it is good to know that you have a buggy > linker...
AFAICS, the linker is not buggy, resulting executables still work OK. But I agree, and won't push this minor issue any further. Thanks, Uros.
