https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99098
Bug 99098 depends on bug 111253, which changed state.
Bug 111253 Summary: [11 Regression] Dodgy pointer name (*_42 = PHI ...) in
-Wfree-nonheap-object diagnostic
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111253
What|Removed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99098
--- Comment #5 from Peter Ross ---
The -1 occurs after checking the malloc()==0 case, so the negative offset is
only ever applied to addresses in [1..limit] range. Thanks for your time!
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99098
--- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Peter Ross from comment #2)
> The following test case produces a -Wfree-nonheap-object false positive. I
> argue that the memory being free'd is heap memory. It is offset by one to
> accomodate t
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99098
--- Comment #3 from Peter Ross ---
Created attachment 55814
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=55814&action=edit
Test case -save-temps output
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99098
Peter Ross changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||pross at xvid dot org
--- Comment #2 from P
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99098
Bug 99098 depends on bug 93873, which changed state.
Bug 93873 Summary: gcc or lto-wrapper does not consider individual bitfield
values on static analysis and instead tests the whole value of all bitfield
bits combined
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzil
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99098
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Alias|
