On Mon, Nov 23, 2015 at 2:45 PM, Ilya Enkovich wrote:
> On 23 Nov 14:29, Richard Biener wrote:
>> On Mon, Nov 23, 2015 at 12:33 PM, Ilya Enkovich
>> wrote:
>> >
>> > I see. But it should still be OK to check type in case of strict
>> > aliasing, right?
>>
>> No, memcpy is always "no-strict-ali
On 23 Nov 14:29, Richard Biener wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 23, 2015 at 12:33 PM, Ilya Enkovich
> wrote:
> >
> > I see. But it should still be OK to check type in case of strict aliasing,
> > right?
>
> No, memcpy is always "no-strict-aliasing"
>
Thanks a lot for help! Here is a variant with a siz
On Mon, Nov 23, 2015 at 12:33 PM, Ilya Enkovich wrote:
> On 23 Nov 11:44, Richard Biener wrote:
>> On Mon, Nov 23, 2015 at 11:10 AM, Ilya Enkovich
>> wrote:
>> > On 23 Nov 10:39, Richard Biener wrote:
>> >> On Fri, Nov 20, 2015 at 3:30 PM, Ilya Enkovich
>> >> wrote:
>> >> > On 20 Nov 14:54, Ri
On 23 Nov 11:44, Richard Biener wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 23, 2015 at 11:10 AM, Ilya Enkovich
> wrote:
> > On 23 Nov 10:39, Richard Biener wrote:
> >> On Fri, Nov 20, 2015 at 3:30 PM, Ilya Enkovich
> >> wrote:
> >> > On 20 Nov 14:54, Richard Biener wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> I don't think you can in any
On Mon, Nov 23, 2015 at 11:10 AM, Ilya Enkovich wrote:
> On 23 Nov 10:39, Richard Biener wrote:
>> On Fri, Nov 20, 2015 at 3:30 PM, Ilya Enkovich
>> wrote:
>> > On 20 Nov 14:54, Richard Biener wrote:
>> >> On Fri, Nov 20, 2015 at 2:08 PM, Ilya Enkovich
>> >> wrote:
>> >> > On 19 Nov 18:19, Ric
On 23 Nov 10:39, Richard Biener wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 20, 2015 at 3:30 PM, Ilya Enkovich wrote:
> > On 20 Nov 14:54, Richard Biener wrote:
> >> On Fri, Nov 20, 2015 at 2:08 PM, Ilya Enkovich
> >> wrote:
> >> > On 19 Nov 18:19, Richard Biener wrote:
> >> >> On November 19, 2015 6:12:30 PM GMT+01:0
On Fri, Nov 20, 2015 at 3:30 PM, Ilya Enkovich wrote:
> On 20 Nov 14:54, Richard Biener wrote:
>> On Fri, Nov 20, 2015 at 2:08 PM, Ilya Enkovich
>> wrote:
>> > On 19 Nov 18:19, Richard Biener wrote:
>> >> On November 19, 2015 6:12:30 PM GMT+01:00, Bernd Schmidt
>> >> wrote:
>> >> >On 11/19/201
On 20 Nov 14:54, Richard Biener wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 20, 2015 at 2:08 PM, Ilya Enkovich wrote:
> > On 19 Nov 18:19, Richard Biener wrote:
> >> On November 19, 2015 6:12:30 PM GMT+01:00, Bernd Schmidt
> >> wrote:
> >> >On 11/19/2015 05:31 PM, Ilya Enkovich wrote:
> >> >> Currently we fold all mem
On Fri, Nov 20, 2015 at 2:08 PM, Ilya Enkovich wrote:
> On 19 Nov 18:19, Richard Biener wrote:
>> On November 19, 2015 6:12:30 PM GMT+01:00, Bernd Schmidt
>> wrote:
>> >On 11/19/2015 05:31 PM, Ilya Enkovich wrote:
>> >> Currently we fold all memcpy/memmove calls with a known data size.
>> >> It
On 19 Nov 18:19, Richard Biener wrote:
> On November 19, 2015 6:12:30 PM GMT+01:00, Bernd Schmidt
> wrote:
> >On 11/19/2015 05:31 PM, Ilya Enkovich wrote:
> >> Currently we fold all memcpy/memmove calls with a known data size.
> >> It causes two problems when used with Pointer Bounds Checker.
> >
On November 19, 2015 6:12:30 PM GMT+01:00, Bernd Schmidt
wrote:
>On 11/19/2015 05:31 PM, Ilya Enkovich wrote:
>> Currently we fold all memcpy/memmove calls with a known data size.
>> It causes two problems when used with Pointer Bounds Checker.
>> The first problem is that we may copy pointers as
On 11/19/2015 05:31 PM, Ilya Enkovich wrote:
Currently we fold all memcpy/memmove calls with a known data size.
It causes two problems when used with Pointer Bounds Checker.
The first problem is that we may copy pointers as integer data
and thus loose bounds. The second problem is that if we inl
Hi,
Currently we fold all memcpy/memmove calls with a known data size.
It causes two problems when used with Pointer Bounds Checker.
The first problem is that we may copy pointers as integer data
and thus loose bounds. The second problem is that if we inline
memcpy, we also have to inline bounds
13 matches
Mail list logo
