On 11/4/19 8:26 PM, Martin Sebor wrote:
> -Warray-bounds doesn't yet have the logic to detect out-of-bounds
> indices into dynamically allocated arrays like VLAs because it
> doesn't track allocation calls. But the warning could detect
> such errors in accesses to VLAs with constant sizes even without
> such tracking.
>
> The attached patch adds this capability. Testing the warning
> revealed that the names and locations of VLAs with constant sizes
> are unavailable, making the warnings less useful than they could
> be otherwise. So the other part of the patch also arranges for
> the arrays backing the constant size VLAs to have names that
> reflect those of the VLAs, and the same location.
>
> Tested on x86_64-linux.
>
> Martin
>
> gcc-92333.diff
>
> PR middle-end/92333 - missing variable name referencing VLA in warnings
> PR middle-end/82608 - missing -Warray-bounds on an out-of-bounds VLA index
>
> gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog:
>
> PR middle-end/92333
> PR middle-end/82608
> * gcc.dg/Warray-bounds-53.c: New test.
>
> gcc/ChangeLog:
>
> PR middle-end/92333
> PR middle-end/82608
> * tree-vrp.c (vrp_prop::check_array_ref): Handle VLAs with constant
> size.
> * tree-ssa-ccp.c (fold_builtin_alloca_with_align): Use a meaninful
> name and location for a temporary variable.
OK
jeff
