On Thu, 2020-04-23 at 16:05 -0600, Martin Sebor wrote:
> On 4/23/20 9:42 AM, Jeff Law wrote:
> > On Wed, 2020-04-22 at 15:36 -0600, Martin Sebor via Gcc-patches wrote:
> > > When computing the size of an object with a flexible array member
> > > the object size pass doesn't consider that the initia
On Thu, 2020-04-23 at 16:05 -0600, Martin Sebor wrote:
> On 4/23/20 9:42 AM, Jeff Law wrote:
> > On Wed, 2020-04-22 at 15:36 -0600, Martin Sebor via Gcc-patches wrote:
> > > When computing the size of an object with a flexible array member
> > > the object size pass doesn't consider that the initia
On 4/23/20 9:42 AM, Jeff Law wrote:
On Wed, 2020-04-22 at 15:36 -0600, Martin Sebor via Gcc-patches wrote:
When computing the size of an object with a flexible array member
the object size pass doesn't consider that the initializer of such
an object can result in its size being in excess of the
On Wed, 2020-04-22 at 15:36 -0600, Martin Sebor via Gcc-patches wrote:
> When computing the size of an object with a flexible array member
> the object size pass doesn't consider that the initializer of such
> an object can result in its size being in excess of the size of
> the enclosing type. As
When computing the size of an object with a flexible array member
the object size pass doesn't consider that the initializer of such
an object can result in its size being in excess of the size of
the enclosing type. As a result, stores into such objects by
string functions causes false positive
