https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72823
--- Comment #7 from David Malcolm ---
Should now be fixed. Keeping open for now, in the hope of addressing libcpp's
gcc_assert.
||2016-08-08
CC||dmalcolm at gcc dot gnu.org
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |dmalcolm at gcc dot
gnu.org
Ever confirmed|0 |1
--- Comment #2 from David Malcolm ---
Sorry about this
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72844
--- Comment #3 from David Malcolm ---
Created attachment 39081
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=39081&action=edit
Ensure that HAVE_ICONV is usable as a conditional
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72844
--- Comment #4 from David Malcolm ---
(In reply to David Malcolm from comment #3)
> Created attachment 39081 [details]
> Ensure that HAVE_ICONV is usable as a conditional
Steve: this fixes the problem for me on a Linux box with iconv hacked out.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52952
--- Comment #45 from David Malcolm ---
Author: dmalcolm
Date: Mon Aug 8 20:10:19 2016
New Revision: 239253
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=239253&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Use class substring_loc in c-format.c (PR c/52952)
gcc/c-family/Chang
||dmalcolm at gcc dot gnu.org
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
--- Comment #1 from David Malcolm ---
Sorry about this.
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 72844 ***
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72844
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||gerald at pfeifer dot com
--- Comment #5
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72844
--- Comment #7 from David Malcolm ---
Author: dmalcolm
Date: Mon Aug 8 20:46:19 2016
New Revision: 239257
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=239257&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Fix selftest::test_lexer_string_locations_ebcdic for systems without ic
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72844
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64955
--- Comment #6 from David Malcolm ---
Author: dmalcolm
Date: Mon Aug 8 22:50:47 2016
New Revision: 239260
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=239260&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
c-format.c: suggest the correct format string to use (PR c/64955)
This
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64955
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
||2016-08-10
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |dmalcolm at gcc dot
gnu.org
Ever confirmed|0 |1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72857
--- Comment #1 from David Malcolm ---
Candidate patch: https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2016-08/msg00867.html
||2016-08-11
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |dmalcolm at gcc dot
gnu.org
Ever confirmed|0 |1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72858
--- Comment #1 from David Malcolm ---
Candidate patch posted here:
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2016-08/msg01053.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72857
--- Comment #2 from David Malcolm ---
Author: dmalcolm
Date: Tue Aug 16 18:19:34 2016
New Revision: 239510
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=239510&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Fix caret locations in format_type_warning (PR c/72857)
gcc/c-family/C
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72857
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
at gcc dot gnu.org |dmalcolm at gcc dot
gnu.org
--- Comment #3 from David Malcolm ---
Mine
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99323
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[9/10/11 Regression] ICE in |[9/10 Regression] ICE in
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95043
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|UNCONFIRMED
Ever confirmed|1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96894
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|Analyzer assumes pointer is |State explosion on gdb's
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97090
--- Comment #11 from David Malcolm ---
Re comment #10: I just tested unknown-fns-4.c and malloc-vs-local-1b.c 500
times each on a --target=i386-pc-solaris2.11 build using the script from
comment #8 and the results were identical each time. So ho
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93355
--- Comment #8 from David Malcolm ---
(In reply to David Malcolm from comment #4)
> (a) It happens to successfully explore enough of the graph to find the leak,
> but hits complexity limits at 1 program point:
>
> pr93355-localealias.c:263:41: w
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: analyzer
Assignee: dmalcolm at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: dmalcolm at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
Call summarization in -fanalyzer has various issues:
* they're off by default (in analyzer.opt), but enabl
onent: analyzer
Assignee: dmalcolm at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: dmalcolm at gcc dot gnu.org
Blocks: 99390
Target Milestone: ---
Consider:
/* Verify that call summaries respect longjmp. */
/* { dg-additional-options "-fanalyzer-call-summaries
--param=analyzer-min-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99391
--- Comment #1 from David Malcolm ---
There may well be a similar issue with exception-handling.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93355
--- Comment #9 from David Malcolm ---
Going back to the summary from comment #4:
(a) It happens to successfully explore enough of the graph to find the leak,
but hits complexity limits at a program point
(b) Without -fno-analyzer-feasibility, it
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98599
--- Comment #10 from David Malcolm ---
I no longer believe the patch in comment #9 is correct.
My latest analysis of this issue is:
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2021-January/564070.html
(I was hoping for a response from Honza on t
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96374
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93355
--- Comment #11 from David Malcolm ---
The above patch fixes the feasibility issue in (b) above, and the analyzer now
successfully emits a diagnostic for the leak.
The only remaining issue is (a) (see comment #9 above).
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93355
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|Missing diagnostic for |Analyzer
|missing fclo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95758
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Blocks||99390
Summary|-Wanalyzer-use-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96894
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Blocks||99390
--- Comment #4 from David Malcolm
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95188
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Blocks||99390
--- Comment #13 from David Malcolm
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99614
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
--- Comment #3 from David Malco
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99614
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89863
Bug 89863 depends on bug 99614, which changed state.
Bug 99614 Summary: diagnostic-manager.cc:85: possible missing copy constructor ?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99614
What|Removed |Added
--
Priority: P3
Component: analyzer
Assignee: dmalcolm at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: dmalcolm at gcc dot gnu.org
Blocks: 97110
Target Milestone: ---
The analyzer could warn about C++ constructors that don't fully initialize all
member variables.
Se
analyzer does not |RFE: detect Flexible Array
|detect Flexible Array |Member misuse in analyzer
|Member misuse |
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |dmalcolm at gcc dot
gnu.org
CC
Assignee: dmalcolm at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: dmalcolm at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
-fanalyzer could probably warn about division by zero:
Consider this easy case (from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89863#c7):
extern void g();
void f
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99260
--- Comment #2 from David Malcolm ---
In reply to David Malcolm from comment #0)
> The analyzer currently has no knowledge of the behavior of "realloc"
> (leading e.g. to bug 99193).
>
> For example, it currently fails to issue a warning for the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99260
--- Comment #3 from David Malcolm ---
Also, bug 81452 tracks warning on realloc(p, 0)
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: analyzer
Assignee: dmalcolm at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: dmalcolm at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
See e.g. bug 80049, where we have code of the form
expr = p->field;
[...]
if (p) ...
We could complain t
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96395
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Blocks||97110
Summary|gcc.dg/analyzer
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99716
--- Comment #1 from David Malcolm ---
Thanks. Looks very similar to bug 93695 - the analyzer "gets confused" in how
it tracks allocations in a loop (albeit with a different kind of resource, and
thus worth tracking as a separate bug).
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99714
--- Comment #1 from David Malcolm ---
The C case in comment #0 doesn't look like what I think you meant to write, and
the analyzer (correctly IMHO) complains about a leak:
: In function 'init':
:22:61: warning: leak of 'p' [CWE-401] [-Wanalyzer-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99716
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2021-03-23
Ever confirmed|0
Component: analyzer
Assignee: dmalcolm at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: dmalcolm at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
In PR 99716 I noted we don't complain about the fprintf in:
FILE *fp = fopen ("/tmp/test", "w");
fprintf (fp, "hello");
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99716
--- Comment #4 from David Malcolm ---
(In reply to David Malcolm from comment #2)
> Also, I think we're missing a warning about "fp" possibly being NULL, for
> the case where the fopen fails.
I've filed this as bug 99738.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95043
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99716
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99044
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93695
--- Comment #4 from David Malcolm ---
The above commit helps with related issues, but doesn't yet fix this bug.
In particular, -Wanalyzer-too-complex shows that the analyzer generates an
infinite chain of states for the loop, and eventually hits
: analyzer
Assignee: dmalcolm at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: dmalcolm at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
Various analyzer diagnostics talk about ""; examples can be seen in
the testsuite:
data-model-10.c:
*new_table->m_f = NULL; // "dereference of pos
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99771
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Last reconfirmed|
: normal
Priority: P3
Component: analyzer
Assignee: dmalcolm at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: dmalcolm at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
Created attachment 50472
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=50472&action=edit
Reduced reproducer
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99774
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99854
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98599
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jseward at acm dot org
--- Comment #11 f
Component: analyzer
Assignee: dmalcolm at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: dmalcolm at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
The analyzer currently is very conservative about aliasing, and assumes that
anything that could be aliased by a pointer gets clobbered when a write occurs
through th
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99771
--- Comment #3 from David Malcolm ---
The above patch fixes some of the occurrences of the bug (due to (b)), but not
those due to (a), so keeping this bug open.
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: analyzer
Assignee: dmalcolm at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: dmalcolm at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
Reproducer:
#include
struct coord {
float x;
float y;
};
void test_34 (void)
{
float *q;
struct
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99886
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99906
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99906
--- Comment #2 from David Malcolm ---
Testing a fix.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99886
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99906
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99860
--- Comment #1 from David Malcolm ---
Notes on "restrict":
https://en.cppreference.com/w/c/language/restrict
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99042
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99774
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100011
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2021-04-10
Status|UNCONFIRM
Keywords: diagnostic
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: dmalcolm at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
>From a discussion on Freenode's #gcc:
https://git.sr.ht/~rkta/irss
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98599
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|fatal error: Cgraph edge|[11 Regression] fatal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99212
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P5
--- Comment #10 from David Malcolm -
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100011
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99212
--- Comment #11 from David Malcolm ---
I experimented with fixing this properly so that it works for all targets, but
the fix involves adding a new region subclass to handle bitfields, and so feels
far too risky for GCC 11.
Hence this should be
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98599
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|WAITING
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100042
--- Comment #1 from David Malcolm ---
I'm not able to reproduce this, but I just committed a fix for PR 98599; does
that fix this for you also?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98599
--- Comment #17 from David Malcolm ---
(In reply to Jan Hubicka from comment #15)
Thanks.
[...]
> So apparenlty analyzer is first pass that does use UIDs of statements at
> WPA time.
I wonder if there should be a debug flag that trashes all UI
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100096
--- Comment #8 from David Malcolm ---
(In reply to Sascha Wilde from comment #6)
> However, please note that
> "Cannot write-enable text segment: Permission denied"
> is the more pressing problem, as it prevents libgccjit to be used
> on NetBSD
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100096
--- Comment #16 from David Malcolm ---
(In reply to Sascha Wilde from comment #10)
> (In reply to David Malcolm from comment #8)
> > It would be good to know exactly where that error message is being emitted.
> >
> > If you add:
> > gcc_jit_c
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: analyzer
Assignee: dmalcolm at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: dmalcolm at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
Consider:
$ cat v.c
# define LIKELY(x) __builtin_expect(!!(x), 1)
__attribute__
Priority: P3
Component: c
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: dmalcolm at gcc dot gnu.org
CC: msebor at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/Common-Function-Attributes.html#index-format-function
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100207
--- Comment #4 from David Malcolm ---
(In reply to Martin Liška from comment #3)
> (In reply to sujay1844 from comment #2)
> > So is the AUR package having a bug??
>
> What's AUR? Can you investigate what sets the -Wformat-security ?
Presumabl
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100207
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|Error in build()|-Werror=format-security
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100207
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |WORKSFORME
Status|UNCONFIRM
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100207
--- Comment #12 from David Malcolm ---
Is that the default /etc/makepkg.conf, or did you hand-edit it? (i.e is this
something that all AUR users are going to run into, or just you?)
Clearly the "-Werror=format-security" is not compatible with
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100207
--- Comment #14 from David Malcolm ---
(In reply to sujay1844 from comment #13)
> (In reply to David Malcolm from comment #12)
> > Is that the default /etc/makepkg.conf, or did you hand-edit it? (i.e is
> > this something that all AUR users are
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100244
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100244
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[11/12 Regression] ICE: |[11 Regression] ICE:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97168
--- Comment #3 from David Malcolm ---
(In reply to Thomas Schwinge from comment #2)
[...]
> (In reply to Martin Sebor from comment #0)
> > FAIL: gcc.dg/plugin/diagnostic-test-expressions-1.c
> > -fplugin=./diagnostic_plugin_test_tree_expression_r
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97168
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |UNCONFIRMED
Ever confirmed|1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97168
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95007
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97258
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97394
--- Comment #5 from David Malcolm ---
Created attachment 49366
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=49366&action=edit
[PATCH] analyzer: don't use in tests [PR97394]
Thanks for filing this bug. Does this patch fix the testsuite
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97424
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||dmalcolm at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97394
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93388
Bug 93388 depends on bug 93723, which changed state.
Bug 93723 Summary: ICEs building ada with -fanalyzer
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93723
What|Removed |Added
--
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93723
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
1901 - 2000 of 3524 matches
Mail list logo
