|Summary:||[8/9/10/11/12 Regression] gcc.dg/Wstrict-overflow-18.c gcc.dg/Wstrict-overflow-7.c gcc.dg/pragma-diag-3.c|
|Product:||gcc||Reporter:||Marc Glisse <glisse>|
|Component:||tree-optimization||Assignee:||Not yet assigned to anyone <unassigned>|
|Build:||Known to work:|
|Known to fail:||Last reconfirmed:||2017-09-29 00:00:00|
Description Marc Glisse 2017-04-24 21:16:53 UTC
I will soon commit a patch that breaks (and xfails) gcc.dg/Wstrict-overflow-18.c, see https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2017-04/msg00986.html. As asked by Martin, this PR is here to track this regression. Most likely this will be solved by Richard (or someone else) killing -Wstrict-overflow.
Comment 1 Marc Glisse 2017-04-25 06:55:48 UTC
Comment 2 Eric Gallager 2017-09-29 00:30:30 UTC
(In reply to Marc Glisse from comment #0) > I will soon commit a patch that breaks (and xfails) > gcc.dg/Wstrict-overflow-18.c, see > https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2017-04/msg00986.html. As asked by > Martin, this PR is here to track this regression. > > Most likely this will be solved by Richard (or someone else) killing > -Wstrict-overflow. Confirmed, although my preferred fix would be to keep and improve -Wstrict-overflow instead of killing it completely.
Comment 3 Marc Glisse 2017-10-14 20:14:33 UTC
https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs/gcc?view=revision&revision=253642 2 more testcases got xfailed: gcc.dg/Wstrict-overflow-7.c and gcc.dg/pragma-diag-3.c. Some possibilities: - add the warning in match.pd: users keep complaining about those strict-overflow warnings, so we would have to take it out of Wall. - add the warning in match.pd, restricted to GENERIC: that gets us close to the gcc-7 situation. - reimplement the warning in the front-end. In general, telling users that we simplified x+1<x to false is an optimization note, not a valid warning (it happens in perfectly fine code where we don't have any easy workaround). However, when the user literally writes x+1<x, that does deserve a warning. This would likely miss a lot of errors we currently notice, but that's unavoidable.
Comment 4 Jakub Jelinek 2018-05-02 10:05:08 UTC
GCC 8.1 has been released.
Comment 5 Jakub Jelinek 2018-07-26 11:01:56 UTC
GCC 8.2 has been released.
Comment 6 Jakub Jelinek 2019-02-22 15:20:57 UTC
GCC 8.3 has been released.
Comment 7 Jakub Jelinek 2020-03-04 09:41:22 UTC
GCC 8.4.0 has been released, adjusting target milestone.