This is the mail archive of the gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: [PATCH] Fix PR64764


On Thu, 5 Feb 2015, Tom de Vries wrote:

> On 26-01-15 15:47, Richard Biener wrote:
> > Index: gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/uninit-19.c
> > ===================================================================
> > --- gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/uninit-19.c	(revision 0)
> > +++ gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/uninit-19.c	(working copy)
> > @@ -0,0 +1,23 @@
> > +/* { dg-do compile } */
> > +/* { dg-options "-O -Wuninitialized" } */
> > +
> > +int a, l, m;
> > +float *b;
> > +float c, d, e, g, h;
> > +unsigned char i, k;
> > +void
> > +fn1 (int p1, float *f1, float *f2, float *f3, unsigned char *c1, float *f4,
> > +     unsigned char *c2, float *p10)
> > +{
> > +  if (p1 & 8)
> > +    b[3] = p10[a];  /* { dg-warning "may be used uninitialized" } */
> > +}
> > +
> > +void
> > +fn2 ()
> > +{
> > +  float *n;
> > +  if (l & 6)
> > +    n = &c + m;
> > +  fn1 (l, &d, &e, &g, &i, &h, &k, n);
> > +}
> 
> Hi Richard,
> 
> this new test fails with -fpic, because fn1 is not inlined.
> 
> Adding static to fn1 allows it to pass both with and without -fpic. But that
> change might affect whether it still serves as a regression test for this PR,
> I'm not sure.
> 
> Another way to fix this could be to use the warning line number 22 instead 13
> for fpic.

Either way is fine with me.

Thanks,
Richard.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]