https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83373
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83373
--- Comment #10 from Martin Sebor ---
Author: msebor
Date: Mon Dec 18 22:49:57 2017
New Revision: 255790
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=255790&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR middle-end/83373 - False positive reported by -Wstringop-overflow
PR t
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83373
--- Comment #9 from Daniel Fruzynski ---
Thanks for explanation. In addition to allocation on stack, my app also uses
custom allocator function like below. So in this case it also should work as
expected.
void* msg_alloc(int msg_id);
...
Msg* m
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83373
--- Comment #8 from Martin Sebor ---
GCC treats the last member array of a [sub]object as a flexible array member
only if it doesn't know the size of the whole object (the subobject can be a
member of a larger struct or an element of an array).
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83373
--- Comment #7 from Daniel Fruzynski ---
In my case structures like Msg above are generated from IDL files together with
code for serialization and deserialization. Because of this I cannot freely
move or add new fields there, this may break comp
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83373
--- Comment #6 from Daniel Fruzynski ---
My understanding is that after this patch will be applied, gcc will still emit
warning for last field in struct, e.g. like in code below. Is my understanding
correct or I missed something?
struct Msg
{
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83373
--- Comment #5 from Martin Sebor ---
I'm not sure I follow what you mean by "I cannot reorder fields or add a new
one at the end to silence this warning."
The patch doesn't rely on any particular ordering of data members to suppress
warnings. O
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83373
--- Comment #4 from Daniel Fruzynski ---
> Bug 83373 - False positive reported by -Wstringop-overflow, is
> another example of warning triggered by a missed optimization
> opportunity, this time in the strlen pass. The optimization
> is discusse
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83373
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||patch
--- Comment #3 from Martin Sebor -
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83373
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned at
10 matches
Mail list logo
