https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71831
--- Comment #9 from Martin Sebor ---
Author: msebor
Date: Fri Sep 2 02:14:50 2016
New Revision: 239953
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=239953&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR tree-optimization/71831 - __builtin_object_size poor results with no
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71831
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71831
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71831
--- Comment #7 from Martin Sebor ---
To elaborate on the use case: my immediate need for it is to detect at compile
time possible buffer overflow in calls to sprintf (the -Wformat-length patch)
without _FORTIFY_SOURCE that not all projects use an
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71831
--- Comment #6 from Martin Sebor ---
I meant comment #0.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71831
--- Comment #5 from Martin Sebor ---
Yes, I understand and agree with that. What I envision is handling just the
basic cases like the ones in comment #2 (and similar) that don't involve the
objsz machinery. My -Wformat-length patch (bug 49905)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71831
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek ---
One of the reasons is that -O0 should mean short compile time. If you schedule
the objsz pass at -O0, you might slow down the compilation, especially on
larger functions.
The glibc headers won't use it at -O
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71831
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|UNCONFIRMED
Resolution|INVALID
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71831
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71831
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1
10 matches
Mail list logo
