This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [PATCH] warn on overflow in calls to allocation functions (bugs 77531 and 78284)
- From: Jakub Jelinek <jakub at redhat dot com>
- To: Martin Sebor <msebor at gmail dot com>
- Cc: Andreas Schwab <schwab at linux-m68k dot org>, Gcc Patch List <gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- Date: Fri, 9 Dec 2016 20:44:09 +0100
- Subject: Re: [PATCH] warn on overflow in calls to allocation functions (bugs 77531 and 78284)
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <204efcec-649f-34a1-22a1-161d1d98ea95@gmail.com> <b1ec8b6d-c583-2d8d-4955-7ad623d05b8a@gmail.com> <9d8970d5-49b8-ac3d-8474-dd3e462399df@gmail.com> <6dff7859-ad37-f94d-a472-9d550043243c@gmail.com> <8737hxtero.fsf@linux-m68k.org> <6a50e899-105f-e51d-3a36-0d44f7722330@gmail.com>
- Reply-to: Jakub Jelinek <jakub at redhat dot com>
On Fri, Dec 09, 2016 at 10:44:17AM -0700, Martin Sebor wrote:
> On 12/09/2016 06:26 AM, Andreas Schwab wrote:
> >FAIL: gcc.dg/attr-alloc_size-3.c (test for warnings, line 445)
> >FAIL: gcc.dg/attr-alloc_size-3.c (test for excess errors)
> >Excess errors:
> >/daten/aranym/gcc/gcc-20161209/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/attr-alloc_size-3.c:244:3: warning: product '65535 * 65535' of arguments 1 and 2 exceeds maximum object size 2147483647 [-Walloc-size-larger-than=]
> >/daten/aranym/gcc/gcc-20161209/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/attr-alloc_size-3.c:298:3: warning: argument 1 value '4294967294' exceeds maximum object size 2147483647 [-Walloc-size-larger-than=]
> >/daten/aranym/gcc/gcc-20161209/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/attr-alloc_size-3.c:299:3: warning: argument 1 value '4294967295' exceeds maximum object size 2147483647 [-Walloc-size-larger-than=]
>
> I assume this was on an ILP32 target like i686. It should be fixed
> by r243497 along with the failures on arm* targets that Christophe
> pointed out earlier. Please let me know if that doesn't clear it
> up for you (and what target).
on arm-unknown-linux-gnueabi (and likely other ILP32) targets.
doesn't look like valid ChangeLog entry (r243497).
Also, especially when adding new tests related to gimple-ssa-sprintf.c
that keep failing on non-x86_64 a lot, it would be nice if you at least
tested them through
make check-gcc RUNTESTFLAGS="--target_board=unix\{-m32,-m64\} dg.exp=name_of_test*"
first.
Jakub