On 08/28/2014 05:19 AM, Jeff Law wrote:
> On 08/21/14 15:44, Chen Gang wrote:
>> int_size_in_bytes() returns HOST_WIDE_INT (64-bit), theoretically, the
>> maximized size is 23 -- it is sizeof("[-9223372036854775808]") for
>> 0x8000LL.
>>
>> It may not cause real world issue, but if anot
On 08/21/14 15:44, Chen Gang wrote:
int_size_in_bytes() returns HOST_WIDE_INT (64-bit), theoretically, the
maximized size is 23 -- it is sizeof("[-9223372036854775808]") for
0x8000LL.
It may not cause real world issue, but if another issues occur, it may
lead things worse.
It passes
On 8/22/14 7:11, Joseph S. Myers wrote:
> On Fri, 22 Aug 2014, Chen Gang wrote:
>
>> 2014-08-17 Chen Gang
>>
>> * c/c-aux-info.c (gen_type): Resize 'buff' from 10 to 23 bytes,
>> with using HOST_WIDE_INT without truncation to 'int'
>
> OK (without the c/ in the ChangeLog entry, as
On Fri, 22 Aug 2014, Chen Gang wrote:
> 2014-08-17 Chen Gang
>
> * c/c-aux-info.c (gen_type): Resize 'buff' from 10 to 23 bytes,
> with using HOST_WIDE_INT without truncation to 'int'
OK (without the c/ in the ChangeLog entry, as it should go in
c/ChangeLog).
--
Joseph S. Myers
int_size_in_bytes() returns HOST_WIDE_INT (64-bit), theoretically, the
maximized size is 23 -- it is sizeof("[-9223372036854775808]") for
0x8000LL.
It may not cause real world issue, but if another issues occur, it may
lead things worse.
It passes normal testsuite: "../gcc/configure &