On 10/13/21 2:25 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
On Wed, Oct 13, 2021 at 3:32 AM Martin Sebor via Gcc-patches
wrote:
On 10/11/21 6:26 PM, Joseph Myers wrote:
The testcase uses the __seg_fs address space, which is x86-specific, but
it isn't in an x86-specific directory or otherwise restricted to x86
On Wed, Oct 13, 2021 at 3:32 AM Martin Sebor via Gcc-patches
wrote:
>
> On 10/11/21 6:26 PM, Joseph Myers wrote:
> > The testcase uses the __seg_fs address space, which is x86-specific, but
> > it isn't in an x86-specific directory or otherwise restricted to x86
> > targets; thus, I'd expect it to
On 10/11/21 6:26 PM, Joseph Myers wrote:
The testcase uses the __seg_fs address space, which is x86-specific, but
it isn't in an x86-specific directory or otherwise restricted to x86
targets; thus, I'd expect it to fail for other architectures.
This is not a review of the rest of the patch.
G
The testcase uses the __seg_fs address space, which is x86-specific, but
it isn't in an x86-specific directory or otherwise restricted to x86
targets; thus, I'd expect it to fail for other architectures.
This is not a review of the rest of the patch.
--
Joseph S. Myers
jos...@codesourcery.com
When determining the size of an object compute_objsize_r() assumes
that addresses derived from null pointers are not derefernceable
because null pointers themselves are not, without calling
targetm.addr_space.zero_address_valid() to see if that assumption
is supported for the pointer on the target
