Re: [PING^5] Re: [PATCH] analyzer: deal with -fshort-enums

: [PING^3] Re: [PATCH] analyzer: deal with -fshort-enums Ping! Kind regards, Torbjörn On 2024-03-08 10:14, Torbjorn SVENSSON wrote: Ping! Kind regards, Torbjörn On 2024-02-22 09:51, Torbjorn SVENSSON wrote: Ping! Kind regards, Torbjörn On 2024-02-07 17:21, Torbjorn SVENSSON wrote: Hi, Is it

Re: [PING^4] Re: [PATCH] analyzer: deal with -fshort-enums

Ping! Rgds, Yvan From: Torbjorn SVENSSON - foss Sent: Friday, March 15, 2024 11:32 AM To: David Malcolm; Alexandre Oliva Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org; Yvan ROUX - foss Subject: [PING^3] Re: [PATCH] analyzer: deal with -fshort-enums Ping! Kind regards

[PING^3] Re: [PATCH] analyzer: deal with -fshort-enums

Ping! Kind regards, Torbjörn On 2024-03-08 10:14, Torbjorn SVENSSON wrote: Ping! Kind regards, Torbjörn On 2024-02-22 09:51, Torbjorn SVENSSON wrote: Ping! Kind regards, Torbjörn On 2024-02-07 17:21, Torbjorn SVENSSON wrote: Hi, Is it okay to backport 3cbab07b08d2f3a3ed34b6ec12e67727c59d

[PING^2] Re: [PATCH] analyzer: deal with -fshort-enums

Ping! Kind regards, Torbjörn On 2024-02-22 09:51, Torbjorn SVENSSON wrote: Ping! Kind regards, Torbjörn On 2024-02-07 17:21, Torbjorn SVENSSON wrote: Hi, Is it okay to backport 3cbab07b08d2f3a3ed34b6ec12e67727c59d285c to releases/gcc-13? Without this backport, I see these failures on arm

[PING] Re: [PATCH] analyzer: deal with -fshort-enums

Ping! Kind regards, Torbjörn On 2024-02-07 17:21, Torbjorn SVENSSON wrote: Hi, Is it okay to backport 3cbab07b08d2f3a3ed34b6ec12e67727c59d285c to releases/gcc-13? Without this backport, I see these failures on arm-none-eabi: FAIL: gcc.dg/analyzer/switch-enum-1.c  (test for bogus messages,

Re: [PATCH] analyzer: deal with -fshort-enums

Hi, Is it okay to backport 3cbab07b08d2f3a3ed34b6ec12e67727c59d285c to releases/gcc-13? Without this backport, I see these failures on arm-none-eabi: FAIL: gcc.dg/analyzer/switch-enum-1.c (test for bogus messages, line 26) FAIL: gcc.dg/analyzer/switch-enum-1.c (test for bogus messages, line

Re: [PATCH] analyzer: deal with -fshort-enums

On Wed, 2023-12-06 at 02:31 -0300, Alexandre Oliva wrote: > On Nov 22, 2023, Alexandre Oliva wrote: > > > Ah, nice, that's a great idea, I wish I'd thought of that!  Will > > do. > > Sorry it took me so long, here it is.  I added two tests, so that, > regardless of the defaults, we get both circ

Re: [PATCH] analyzer: deal with -fshort-enums

On Nov 22, 2023, Alexandre Oliva wrote: > Ah, nice, that's a great idea, I wish I'd thought of that! Will do. Sorry it took me so long, here it is. I added two tests, so that, regardless of the defaults, we get both circumstances tested, without repetition. Regstrapped on x86_64-linux-gnu. A

Re: [PATCH] analyzer: deal with -fshort-enums

On Nov 20, 2023, David Malcolm wrote: > On Sun, 2023-11-19 at 04:39 -0300, Alexandre Oliva wrote: >> >> On platforms that enable -fshort-enums by default, various switch- >> enum >> analyzer tests fail, because apply_constraints_for_gswitch doesn't >> expect the integral promotion type cast.  I'

Re: [PATCH] analyzer: deal with -fshort-enums

On Sun, 2023-11-19 at 04:39 -0300, Alexandre Oliva wrote: > > On platforms that enable -fshort-enums by default, various switch- > enum > analyzer tests fail, because apply_constraints_for_gswitch doesn't > expect the integral promotion type cast.  I've arranged for the code > to cope with those c

[PATCH] analyzer: deal with -fshort-enums

On platforms that enable -fshort-enums by default, various switch-enum analyzer tests fail, because apply_constraints_for_gswitch doesn't expect the integral promotion type cast. I've arranged for the code to cope with those casts. Regstrapped on x86_64-linux-gnu, also tested on arm-eabi with d