Sure. No problem. Thanks for looking at this. Aldy
On Fri, May 31, 2019, 17:48 Marc Glisse <marc.gli...@inria.fr> wrote: > On Fri, 31 May 2019, Aldy Hernandez wrote: > > > I've never been too happy with the too large due to cast warnings. For > that > > matter, it seems like a lot of the unbounded alloca warning variants were > > artifacts of the way we couldn't get precise ranges after vrp asserts had > > disappeared and we were trying to guess at what the actual range in the > > original code was. It's fragile at best. > > Yes, very fragile. > > > I haven't been paying too much attention to walloca because the ranger > gets > > considerably better context ranges in the ranger walloca version, and we > > are getting correct warnings for a variety of things we couldn't before. > So > > I was hoping to ignore this until we all agreed on what range, vrp etc > will > > look like going forward. > > Seems sensible. > > > That being said, I could take a closer look at this xfail on Monday if > > y'all would like. But I don't currently have strong opinions either way. > I > > guess it'll all change in the next few months. > > As long as you are ok with one Walloca testcase being xfailed until the > VRP work lands, I don't think there is a need to spend time on it now. > > -- > Marc Glisse >
