On Sun, Jan 26, 2020 at 12:09:09PM +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 25, 2020 at 07:13:20PM -0500, Marek Polacek wrote:
> > Here we crash when using -fsanitize=address -fdump-tree-sanopt because
> > the dumping code uses IDENTIFIER_POINTER on a null DECL_NAME. Instead,
> > we can print "<anonymous>" in such a case. Or we could avoid printing
> > that diagnostic altogether.
> >
> > I don't think this warrants a testcase.
> >
> > Tested x86_64-linux, ok for trunk and 9?
>
> Wouldn't it be better to:
> if (dump_file)
> {
> fprintf (dump_file,
> "Rewriting parameter whose address is taken: ");
> print_generic_expr (dump_file, arg, dump_flags);
> fputc ('\n', dump_file);
> }
> or so? That way, we can print D.1234 for those, but user has a way
> to override it to D.xxxx etc.
Sure, that's better, thanks.
Here we crash when using -fsanitize=address -fdump-tree-sanopt because
the dumping code uses IDENTIFIER_POINTER on a null DECL_NAME. Instead,
we can use print_generic_expr.
Tested x86_64-linux, ok for trunk and 9?
2020-01-26 Marek Polacek <pola...@redhat.com>
PR tree-optimization/93436
* sanopt.c (sanitize_rewrite_addressable_params): Avoid crash on
null DECL_NAME.
---
gcc/sanopt.c | 9 ++++++---
1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/gcc/sanopt.c b/gcc/sanopt.c
index 619aae45a15..0788eef597e 100644
--- a/gcc/sanopt.c
+++ b/gcc/sanopt.c
@@ -1174,9 +1174,12 @@ sanitize_rewrite_addressable_params (function *fun)
continue;
if (dump_file)
- fprintf (dump_file,
- "Rewriting parameter whose address is taken: %s\n",
- IDENTIFIER_POINTER (DECL_NAME (arg)));
+ {
+ fprintf (dump_file,
+ "Rewriting parameter whose address is taken: ");
+ print_generic_expr (dump_file, arg, dump_flags);
+ fputc ('\n', dump_file);
+ }
SET_DECL_PT_UID (var, DECL_PT_UID (arg));
base-commit: 9664b52aeb3db9ae35bba1766d677790c8a461ef
--
Marek Polacek • Red Hat, Inc. • 300 A St, Boston, MA
