On 02/16/2016 05:55 PM, Martin Sebor wrote: > I think the new text deserves a new heading of its own rather than > being added under the existing "Stricter flexible array member rules." > (The "Finally..." part changed by the patch still applies to the > flexible array members.) > > Martin
Hi Martin. Thanks for the nit, fixed in v2. Ready to be installed? Martin
Index: htdocs/gcc-6/porting_to.html =================================================================== RCS file: /cvs/gcc/wwwdocs/htdocs/gcc-6/porting_to.html,v retrieving revision 1.14 diff --unified -r1.14 porting_to.html --- htdocs/gcc-6/porting_to.html 14 Feb 2016 13:13:43 -0000 1.14 +++ htdocs/gcc-6/porting_to.html 17 Feb 2016 14:20:13 -0000 @@ -324,6 +324,52 @@ <tt>-fabi-version</tt> or <tt>-Wabi</tt> option to disable or warn about. </p> +<h3>More aggressive optimization of <code>-flifetime-dse</code></h3> + +<p> +The C++ compiler (with enabled <code>-flifetime-dse</code>) +has been more aggressive in dead-store elimination in situations where +a memory store to a location precedes a constructor to the +memory location. Described situation can be commonly found in programs +which zero a memory that is eventually passed to a placement new operator: + +<pre><code> +#include <stdlib.h> +#include <string.h> +#include <assert.h> + +struct A +{ + A () {} + void *operator new (size_t s) + { + void *ptr = malloc (s); + memset (ptr, 0, s); + return ptr; + } + + int value; +}; + +A * +__attribute__ ((noinline)) +build (void) +{ + return new A (); +} + +int main() +{ + A *a = build (); + assert (a->value == 0); /* Use of uninitialized value */ + free (a); +} +</code></pre> + +If the program cannot be fixed to remove the undefined behavior then +the option <code>-fno-lifetime-dse</code> can be used to disable +this optimization. + <h2>-Wmisleading-indentation</h2> <p> A new warning <code>-Wmisleading-indentation</code> was added