This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: Can realloc be marked as a mallloc-like function?
- From: "Janne Blomqvist" <blomqvist dot janne at gmail dot com>
- To: "H.J. Lu" <hjl at lucon dot org>
- Cc: "Tobias Schlüter" <tobias dot schlueter at physik dot uni-muenchen dot de>, gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org, fortran at gcc dot gnu dot org, jb at gcc dot gnu dot org, "GNU C Library" <libc-alpha at sources dot redhat dot com>
- Date: Sun, 15 Jul 2007 10:17:56 +0300
- Subject: Re: Can realloc be marked as a mallloc-like function?
- References: <20070714160016.GA7949@lucon.org> <4698F3D5.email@example.com> <20070714162019.GA8046@lucon.org>
On 7/14/07, H.J. Lu <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
On Sat, Jul 14, 2007 at 06:03:33PM +0200, Tobias Schlüter wrote:
> H.J. Lu wrote:
> >It looks like gcc assumes a functon marked with DECL_IS_MALLOC won't
> >return an address which can alias something else. But it isn't true
> >for realloc. Now, the qestions are
> >1. Can gcc make such an assumption?
> >2. Can realloc be marked as DECL_IS_MALLOC.
> >BTW, glibc also marks realloc with __attribute_malloc__.
> There was an absurdely long thread on this topic starting at
> <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2004-01/msg00005.html>. I didn't dig through
> it to find the answer.
Now, we have a real testcase to show the problem. How do we solve
I assigned the bug to myself, since I caused it. However, as the
regression is not seen on x86, I suppose there is only so much I can
do. HJL, can you confirm that indeed removing only the DECL_IS_MALLOC
of internal_realloc fixes the issue on IA-64?
When I get back home tonight I'll take a look at the trees created by
array_constructor_6 and see if we do something obviously stupid, i.e.
can the frontend be fixed in some other way so that we can still keep
internal_realloc marked with DECL_IS_MALLOC.