[Bug c/47937] New: possible integer bug

["regehr at cs dot utah.edu" <gcc-bugzilla at gcc dot gnu dot org>]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47937

           Summary: possible integer bug
           Product: gcc
           Version: 4.6.0
            Status: UNCONFIRMED
          Severity: normal
          Priority: P3
         Component: c
        AssignedTo: unassigned@gcc.gnu.org
        ReportedBy: regehr@cs.utah.edu
              Host: i686-pc-linux-gnu
            Target: i686-pc-linux-gnu
             Build: i686-pc-linux-gnu


Created attachment 23498
  --> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=23498
test case

The attached program, compiled using r170512 on x86, produces the following
output:

regehr@home:~$ current-gcc -O overflow.c -o overflow
regehr@home:~$ ./overflow 
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 

I believe this output is correct.  However, at -O2 the function foo() is
compiled to return constant true:

foo:
    movl    $1, %eax
    ret

I believe this is a miscompilation.  The C99 standard says:

  The expression ++E is equivalent to (E+=1).

Thus, x is promoted to integer before being incremented, and so no signed
overflow can happen.  Therefore, foo() must check for the case where the
incremented integer is truncated when cast back to char, instead of simply
returning true.