On 08/28/18 11:25, Bernd Edlinger wrote: > On 08/28/18 04:55, Jeff Law wrote: >> On 08/23/2018 08:48 AM, Bernd Edlinger wrote: >>> On 08/23/18 16:24, Jeff Law wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Yes, and which one was the earlier, more controversial patch from me? >>>> >>>> https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2018-07/msg01800.html >>>> >>>> >>>> Which is the issue I'm working through right now :-) >>>> >>> >>> Okay, please note that a re-based patch is here: >>> >>> https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2018-08/msg01005.html >>> >>> and if you want, you can split that patch in two parts: >>> >>> first: >>> 86711 fix: >>> 2018-08-17 Bernd Edlinger <bernd.edlin...@hotmail.de> >>> >>> PR middle-end/86711 >>> * expr.c (string_constant): Don't return truncated string >>> literals. >>> >>> * gcc.c-torture/execute/pr86711.c: New test. >> Note that while this fixes your pr86711.c, it doesn't fix the larger set >> of tests Martin has created for the issues in pr86711. >> >> Sigh. >> jeff >> > > > Hmm. which test do you mean? > > I just looked at the tests from part1/6. > > there I found test cases memchr-1.c, pr86714.c, strlenopt-56.c > > test them against trunk from yesterday (only build stage1): > $ svn info > Path: . > Working Copy Root Path: /home/ed/gnu/gcc-trunk > URL: svn+ssh://edlin...@gcc.gnu.org/svn/gcc/trunk > Relative URL: ^/trunk > Repository Root: svn+ssh://edlin...@gcc.gnu.org/svn/gcc > Repository UUID: 138bc75d-0d04-0410-961f-82ee72b054a4 > Revision: 263893 > Node Kind: directory > Schedule: normal > Last Changed Author: jakub > Last Changed Rev: 263891 > Last Changed Date: 2018-08-27 20:36:23 +0200 (Mon, 27 Aug 2018) > > memchr-1.c fail > pr86714.c fail > strlenopt-56.c pass > > I don't know what this test case is trying to test, sorry. > What is obvious about it: > > static const wchar_t wsx[] = L"\x12345678"; > static const wchar_t ws4[] = L"\x00123456\x12005678\x12340078\x12345600"; > > This will be one more failed test case on AIX, given it uses -Wall. > > Now I apply my pr86711 patch (only expr.c changed): > > result > memchr-1.c pass > pr86714.c pass >
Wow, wait a moment. When I wrote this: https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2018-08/msg01089.html with the original test results of the pr86711 patch I wrote: "This time I attach the test results for your reference: gcc-trunk-263644-test.txt: unchanged r263644 gcc-trunk-263644-0-test.txt: r263644 + this patch gcc-trunk-263644-1-test.txt: r263644 + this patch without string_constant" "this patch" means both parts, "this patch without string_constant" means only fold-const.c changed. string_constant is in expr.c. I have mis-remembered that, deeply sorry about it. So I try it the other way round: apply pr86711 patch (only fold-const.c/h changed): memchr-1.c pass pr86714.c fail strlenop-56.c pass (which probably disqualifies that test case) So this would have been the correct changelog: 2018-08-17 Bernd Edlinger <bernd.edlin...@hotmail.de> PR middle-end/86711 * fold-const.c (c_getstr): Fix function comment. Remove unused third argument. Fix range checks. * fold-const.h (c_getstr): Adjust prototype. * gcc.c-torture/execute/pr86711.c: New test. Bernd.
