[Bug middle-end/101913] -Wstrict-overflow -O3 false alarm on tzdb localtime.c

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101913 Martin Liška changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords|needs-bisection | CC|

[Bug middle-end/101913] -Wstrict-overflow -O3 false alarm on tzdb localtime.c

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101913 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||needs-bisection --- Comment #4 from And

[Bug middle-end/101913] -Wstrict-overflow -O3 false alarm on tzdb localtime.c

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101913 --- Comment #3 from eggert at cs dot ucla.edu --- (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #1) > >-1L << 63 is LONG_MIN > No it is undefined and has an overflow bit on it. > You want (long)(-1UL << 63) for it be correct. > But the warning is still

[Bug middle-end/101913] -Wstrict-overflow -O3 false alarm on tzdb localtime.c

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101913 eggert at cs dot ucla.edu changed: What|Removed |Added Attachment #51304|0 |1 is obsolete|

[Bug middle-end/101913] -Wstrict-overflow -O3 false alarm on tzdb localtime.c

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101913 --- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski --- >-1L << 63 is LONG_MIN No it is undefined and has an overflow bit on it. You want (long)(-1UL << 63) for it be correct. But the warning is still there. I thought -fsanitize=undefined enabled -fwrapv too ...