https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116834
--- Comment #2 from Kacper Michajłow ---
static inline struct bstr bstr0(const char *s)
{
return (struct bstr){(unsigned char *)s, s ? strlen(s) : 0};
}
void bstr_xappend_vasprintf(void *talloc_ctx, bstr *s, const char *fmt,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116834
Bug ID: 116834
Summary: "warning: null format string" false positive with
UBSAN
Product: gcc
Version: 14.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Pri
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106931
Kacper Michajłow changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88443
Bug 88443 depends on bug 106931, which changed state.
Bug 106931 Summary: [12 Regression] -Wstringop-overflow false positive -O3
-fno-tree-vectorize with loop unrolling since r12-3300-gece28da924ddda8b
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?i
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116307
--- Comment #3 from Kacper Michajłow ---
(In reply to Kacper Michajłow from comment #2)
> (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #1)
> > Note I don't think the warning is not incorrect. Nor I don't think unrolling
> > by 3 is wrong either.
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116307
--- Comment #2 from Kacper Michajłow ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #1)
> Note I don't think the warning is not incorrect. Nor I don't think unrolling
> by 3 is wrong either.
Could you explain why unrolling by 3 is not wrong in th
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116307
Bug ID: 116307
Summary: [14 Regression] off by one when loop unrolling and
bogus -Wstringop-overflow
Product: gcc
Version: 14.2.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106931
Bug ID: 106931
Summary: -Wstringop-overflow false positive
Product: gcc
Version: 12.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: tree-optimi
