Message ID | 20211110145947.GH97553@kam.mff.cuni.cz |
---|---|
State | New |
Headers |
Return-Path: <gcc-patches-bounces+patchwork=sourceware.org@gcc.gnu.org> X-Original-To: patchwork@sourceware.org Delivered-To: patchwork@sourceware.org Received: from server2.sourceware.org (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5697B385840C for <patchwork@sourceware.org>; Wed, 10 Nov 2021 15:00:19 +0000 (GMT) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 5697B385840C DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gcc.gnu.org; s=default; t=1636556419; bh=CTy5BEtnBwqiiidRtY8iR19LRgrMLjz7dWW5gSC6caY=; h=Date:To:Subject:List-Id:List-Unsubscribe:List-Archive:List-Post: List-Help:List-Subscribe:From:Reply-To:From; b=xupmnKY+ZOMgW0iGoml16ur5HE6FTUOHx/oaNxxi2TWI6Q7t/qSvF1OrhIyKciEWY BSWZlDYDewpTt0ttW55orcKzVbqN5LhcqHll4N/a0EWkFeauEtI0sRPxJzU3SJqMPf azqIcwC0bWpz7wHiF51cmbHNyXK7HpzNKJ1lGlBI= X-Original-To: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org Delivered-To: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org Received: from nikam.ms.mff.cuni.cz (nikam.ms.mff.cuni.cz [195.113.20.16]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6DF9B3858400 for <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>; Wed, 10 Nov 2021 14:59:49 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.1 sourceware.org 6DF9B3858400 Received: by nikam.ms.mff.cuni.cz (Postfix, from userid 16202) id 4529528270D; Wed, 10 Nov 2021 15:59:47 +0100 (CET) Date: Wed, 10 Nov 2021 15:59:47 +0100 To: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org Subject: Silence additional warning in gfortran.dg/do_subscript_3.f90 Message-ID: <20211110145947.GH97553@kam.mff.cuni.cz> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13) X-Spam-Status: No, score=-11.4 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00, DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU, GIT_PATCH_0, KAM_NUMSUBJECT, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL, SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_NONE, TXREP autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on server2.sourceware.org X-BeenThere: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Gcc-patches mailing list <gcc-patches.gcc.gnu.org> List-Unsubscribe: <https://gcc.gnu.org/mailman/options/gcc-patches>, <mailto:gcc-patches-request@gcc.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/> List-Post: <mailto:gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org> List-Help: <mailto:gcc-patches-request@gcc.gnu.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://gcc.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gcc-patches>, <mailto:gcc-patches-request@gcc.gnu.org?subject=subscribe> From: Jan Hubicka via Gcc-patches <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org> Reply-To: Jan Hubicka <hubicka@kam.mff.cuni.cz> Errors-To: gcc-patches-bounces+patchwork=sourceware.org@gcc.gnu.org Sender: "Gcc-patches" <gcc-patches-bounces+patchwork=sourceware.org@gcc.gnu.org> |
Series |
Silence additional warning in gfortran.dg/do_subscript_3.f90
|
|
Commit Message
Jan Hubicka
Nov. 10, 2021, 2:59 p.m. UTC
Hi, the testcase tests for out of bound accesses warnings and with ipa-modref improvements it now triggers a new warning: /aux/hubicka/trunk-git/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/do_subscript_3.f90:11:9: Warning: (1) /aux/hubicka/trunk-git/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/do_subscript_3.f90:10:47: Warning: Array reference at (1) out of bounds (0 < 1) in loop beginning at (2) /aux/hubicka/trunk-git/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/do_subscript_3.f90:19:9: Warning: (1) /aux/hubicka/trunk-git/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/do_subscript_3.f90:18:45: Warning: Array reference at (1) out of bounds (6 > 5) in loop beginning at (2) /aux/hubicka/trunk-git/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/do_subscript_3.f90:19:50: Warning: iteration 5 invokes undefined behavior [-Waggressive-loop-optimizations] /aux/hubicka/trunk-git/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/do_subscript_3.f90:18:9: note: within this loop I suppose we now are able to propagate array bounds better into the nested function. The last warning is new and correct even though little bit redundant. I think we may just silence it? I wonder why we do not get same fact on the first loop (which hits out of bound access already at iteration 0). Looks OK? Honza gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog: 2021-11-10 Jan Hubicka <hubicka@ucw.cz> * gfortran.dg/do_subscript_3.f90: Add -Wno-aggressive-loop-optimizations.
Comments
On Wed, Nov 10, 2021 at 4:00 PM Jan Hubicka via Gcc-patches <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org> wrote: > > Hi, > the testcase tests for out of bound accesses warnings and with ipa-modref improvements > it now triggers a new warning: > > /aux/hubicka/trunk-git/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/do_subscript_3.f90:11:9: Warning: (1) > /aux/hubicka/trunk-git/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/do_subscript_3.f90:10:47: Warning: Array reference at (1) out of bounds (0 < 1) in loop beginning at (2) > /aux/hubicka/trunk-git/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/do_subscript_3.f90:19:9: Warning: (1) > /aux/hubicka/trunk-git/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/do_subscript_3.f90:18:45: Warning: Array reference at (1) out of bounds (6 > 5) in loop beginning at (2) > /aux/hubicka/trunk-git/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/do_subscript_3.f90:19:50: Warning: iteration 5 invokes undefined behavior [-Waggressive-loop-optimizations] > /aux/hubicka/trunk-git/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/do_subscript_3.f90:18:9: note: within this loop > > I suppose we now are able to propagate array bounds better into the > nested function. > > The last warning is new and correct even though little bit redundant. I think > we may just silence it? I wonder why we do not get same fact on the first loop > (which hits out of bound access already at iteration 0). > > Looks OK? I guess so - but it looks like the testcase exercises diagnostics in the frontend so I wonder whether simply using { dg-options "-O0" } might be more appropriate? > Honza > > gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog: > > 2021-11-10 Jan Hubicka <hubicka@ucw.cz> > > * gfortran.dg/do_subscript_3.f90: Add -Wno-aggressive-loop-optimizations. > > diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/do_subscript_3.f90 b/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/do_subscript_3.f90 > index 2f62f58142b..18ed9a2f0c9 100644 > --- a/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/do_subscript_3.f90 > +++ b/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/do_subscript_3.f90 > @@ -1,4 +1,5 @@ > ! { dg-do compile } > +! { dg-additional-options "-Wno-aggressive-loop-optimizations" } > ! PR fortran/91424 > ! Check that only one warning is issued inside blocks, and that > ! warnings are also issued for contained subroutines.
diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/do_subscript_3.f90 b/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/do_subscript_3.f90 index 2f62f58142b..18ed9a2f0c9 100644 --- a/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/do_subscript_3.f90 +++ b/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/do_subscript_3.f90 @@ -1,4 +1,5 @@ ! { dg-do compile } +! { dg-additional-options "-Wno-aggressive-loop-optimizations" } ! PR fortran/91424 ! Check that only one warning is issued inside blocks, and that ! warnings are also issued for contained subroutines.