On Tue, 2022-02-15 at 14:28 +0100, Richard Biener wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 15, 2022 at 2:00 PM Julian Seward
> wrote:
> >
> > Sorry for the delayed response. I've been paging this all back in.
> >
> > I first saw this problem when memcheck-ing Firefox as compiled by
> > Clang, some
> > years back.
On Tue, Feb 15, 2022 at 2:00 PM Julian Seward wrote:
>
> Sorry for the delayed response. I've been paging this all back in.
>
> I first saw this problem when memcheck-ing Firefox as compiled by Clang, some
> years back. Not long after GCC was also at it. The transformation in
> question is (at
Sorry for the delayed response. I've been paging this all back in.
I first saw this problem when memcheck-ing Firefox as compiled by Clang, some
years back. Not long after GCC was also at it. The transformation in
question is (at the C level):
A && B ==> B && A if it can be proved that A
Hi Richard,
On Tue, 2022-02-15 at 08:25 +0100, Richard Biener wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 14, 2022 at 6:38 PM Mark Wielaard wrote:
> > Yes. valgrind keeps track of uninitialized bits and propagates them
> > around till "use". Where use is anything that might alter the
> > observable behavior of the prog
On Mon, Feb 14, 2022 at 6:38 PM Mark Wielaard wrote:
>
> On Mon, 2022-02-14 at 12:20 -0500, David Malcolm wrote:
> > On Mon, 2022-02-14 at 17:57 +0100, Mark Wielaard wrote:
> > > On Mon, 2022-02-14 at 10:57 -0500, David Malcolm wrote:
> > > > [CCing Mark in the hopes of insight from the valgrind s
On Mon, 2022-02-14 at 12:20 -0500, David Malcolm wrote:
> On Mon, 2022-02-14 at 17:57 +0100, Mark Wielaard wrote:
> > On Mon, 2022-02-14 at 10:57 -0500, David Malcolm wrote:
> > > [CCing Mark in the hopes of insight from the valgrind side of
> > > things]
> >
> > Adding Julian to CC so he can corr
On Mon, 2022-02-14 at 17:57 +0100, Mark Wielaard wrote:
> Hi David,
>
> On Mon, 2022-02-14 at 10:57 -0500, David Malcolm wrote:
> > [CCing Mark in the hopes of insight from the valgrind side of
> > things]
>
> Adding Julian to CC so he can correct me if I say something silly.
>
> > There is a fa
On Mon, 2022-02-14 at 09:26 -0700, Jeff Law wrote:
>
>
> On 2/14/2022 8:57 AM, David Malcolm via Gcc wrote:
> > [CCing Mark in the hopes of insight from the valgrind side of things]
> >
> > There is a false positive from -Wanalyzer-use-of-uninitialized-value
> > on
> > gcc.dg/analyzer/pr102692.c
Hi David,
On Mon, 2022-02-14 at 10:57 -0500, David Malcolm wrote:
> [CCing Mark in the hopes of insight from the valgrind side of things]
Adding Julian to CC so he can correct me if I say something silly.
> There is a false positive from -Wanalyzer-use-of-uninitialized-value on
> gcc.dg/analyzer
On 2/14/2022 8:57 AM, David Malcolm via Gcc wrote:
[CCing Mark in the hopes of insight from the valgrind side of things]
There is a false positive from -Wanalyzer-use-of-uninitialized-value on
gcc.dg/analyzer/pr102692.c here:
‘fix_overlays_before’: events 1-3
|
| 75 | while
[CCing Mark in the hopes of insight from the valgrind side of things]
There is a false positive from -Wanalyzer-use-of-uninitialized-value on
gcc.dg/analyzer/pr102692.c here:
‘fix_overlays_before’: events 1-3
|
| 75 | while (tail
| |
| 76 | && (
11 matches
Mail list logo
