On Mon, Jan 21, 2019 at 4:57 AM Maxim Kuvyrkov
wrote:
>
> Hi H.J.,
>
> I've bisected compiler crash on building linux kernel for ARM down to this
> commit. Search for
> ==
> fs/ntfs/super.c:597:3: internal compiler error: Segmentation fault
> ==
> in
> https://ci.linaro.org/view/tcwg_kernel-gnu
Hi H.J.,
I've bisected compiler crash on building linux kernel for ARM down to this
commit. Search for
==
fs/ntfs/super.c:597:3: internal compiler error: Segmentation fault
==
in
https://ci.linaro.org/view/tcwg_kernel-gnu/job/tcwg_kernel-build-gnu-master-arm-mainline-defconfig/285/artifact/arti
On Thu, Jan 17, 2019 at 04:00:47PM -0800, H.J. Lu wrote:
> gcc/c-family/
>
> PR c/51628
> PR c/88664
> * c-common.h (warn_for_address_or_pointer_of_packed_member):
> Remove the boolean argument.
> * c-warn.c (check_address_of_packed_member): Renamed to ...
> (ch
move the
> > while (TREE_CODE (rhs) == COMPOUND_EXPR)
> >rhs = TREE_OPERAND (rhs, 1);
> >
> > before the if (TREE_CODE (rhs) == COND_EXPR) check and stick another
> > STRIP_NOPS in between.
>
> Fixed.
>
> > > @@ -2795,58 +2862,5 @@ warn_for
hs) == COND_EXPR) check and stick another
> STRIP_NOPS in between.
Fixed.
> > @@ -2795,58 +2862,5 @@ warn_for_address_or_pointer_of_packed_member (bool
> > convert_p, tree type,
> >while (TREE_CODE (rhs) == COMPOUND_EXPR)
> > rhs = TREE_OPERAND (rhs, 1);
&g
On Wed, Jan 16, 2019 at 08:57:25PM -0800, H.J. Lu wrote:
> Check unaligned pointer conversion and strip NOPS.
> -check_address_of_packed_member (tree type, tree rhs)
> +check_address_or_pointer_of_packed_member (tree type, tree rhs)
> {
>if (INDIRECT_REF_P (rhs))
> rhs = TREE_OPERAND (rh
On Wed, Jan 16, 2019 at 3:09 PM Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>
> On Mon, Jan 14, 2019 at 03:23:07PM -0800, H.J. Lu wrote:
> > There are no regressions with this patch:
> >
> > https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2019-01/msg00792.html
>
> As the patch seems to be a step forward and fixes an important regres
On Wed, Jan 16, 2019 at 8:57 PM H.J. Lu wrote:
>
> On Wed, Jan 16, 2019 at 01:28:26PM +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> > On Wed, Jan 16, 2019 at 04:11:44AM -0800, H.J. Lu wrote:
> > > > Why? What is so special about C and (implicit?) casts where the rhs
> > > > isn't
> > > > ADDR_EXPR? Aren't all
On Wed, Jan 16, 2019 at 01:28:26PM +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 16, 2019 at 04:11:44AM -0800, H.J. Lu wrote:
> > > Why? What is so special about C and (implicit?) casts where the rhs isn't
> > > ADDR_EXPR? Aren't all casts (explicit or implicit) from one pointer type
> > > to another
On Mon, Jan 14, 2019 at 03:23:07PM -0800, H.J. Lu wrote:
> There are no regressions with this patch:
>
> https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2019-01/msg00792.html
As the patch seems to be a step forward and fixes an important regression,
the patch is ok for trunk, but I'd like to keep discussions
On Wed, Jan 16, 2019 at 04:11:44AM -0800, H.J. Lu wrote:
> > Why? What is so special about C and (implicit?) casts where the rhs isn't
> > ADDR_EXPR? Aren't all casts (explicit or implicit) from one pointer type
> > to another pointer and satisfy the rules something that should be warned
>
> -Wi
On Wed, Jan 16, 2019 at 3:30 AM Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>
> On Mon, Jan 14, 2019 at 10:00:11AM -0800, H.J. Lu wrote:
> > On Mon, Jan 14, 2019 at 6:22 AM Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> > >
> > > On Sun, Jan 13, 2019 at 06:54:05AM -0800, H.J. Lu wrote:
> > > > > What always matters is whether we take address
On Mon, Jan 14, 2019 at 10:00:11AM -0800, H.J. Lu wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 14, 2019 at 6:22 AM Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> >
> > On Sun, Jan 13, 2019 at 06:54:05AM -0800, H.J. Lu wrote:
> > > > What always matters is whether we take address of a packed structure
> > > > field/non-static data member or whet
On Mon, Jan 14, 2019 at 10:00 AM H.J. Lu wrote:
>
> On Mon, Jan 14, 2019 at 6:22 AM Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> >
> > On Sun, Jan 13, 2019 at 06:54:05AM -0800, H.J. Lu wrote:
> > > > What always matters is whether we take address of a packed structure
> > > > field/non-static data member or whether we
inter -> pointer
> conversion warning somewhere else (wherever we detect a pointer to pointer
> conversion, even in the middle of expression?), or do it wherever you do
> currently, but again always if the orig_rhs and type pointer types are
> different.
>
When convert_p is tru
15 matches
Mail list logo