Avoid undefined behaviour in build_option_suggestions
Checks
Context |
Check |
Description |
linaro-tcwg-bot/tcwg_gcc_build--master-arm |
success
|
Build passed
|
linaro-tcwg-bot/tcwg_gcc_check--master-arm |
success
|
Test passed
|
linaro-tcwg-bot/tcwg_gcc_build--master-aarch64 |
success
|
Build passed
|
linaro-tcwg-bot/tcwg_gcc_check--master-aarch64 |
success
|
Test passed
|
Commit Message
The inner loop in build_option_suggestions uses OPTION to take the
address of OPTB and use it across iterations, which is undefined
behaviour since OPTB is defined within the loop. Pull it outside the
loop to make this defined.
It's a trivial fix, so posting early. OK to commit once build and test
succeeds?
Thanks,
Sid
gcc/ChangeLog:
* opt-suggestions.cc
(option_proposer::build_option_suggestions): Pull OPTB
definition out of the innermost loop.
---
gcc/opt-suggestions.cc | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
Comments
On Fri, Jul 19, 2024 at 12:52:06PM -0400, Siddhesh Poyarekar wrote:
> The inner loop in build_option_suggestions uses OPTION to take the
> address of OPTB and use it across iterations, which is undefined
> behaviour since OPTB is defined within the loop. Pull it outside the
> loop to make this defined.
>
> It's a trivial fix, so posting early. OK to commit once build and test
> succeeds?
>
> Thanks,
> Sid
>
> gcc/ChangeLog:
>
> * opt-suggestions.cc
> (option_proposer::build_option_suggestions): Pull OPTB
> definition out of the innermost loop.
Ok for trunk, 14, 13 & 12 branches.
> ---
> gcc/opt-suggestions.cc | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/gcc/opt-suggestions.cc b/gcc/opt-suggestions.cc
> index 849e4f5c439..71e5cb561a6 100644
> --- a/gcc/opt-suggestions.cc
> +++ b/gcc/opt-suggestions.cc
> @@ -167,9 +167,9 @@ option_proposer::build_option_suggestions (const char *prefix)
> add_misspelling_candidates (m_option_suggestions, option,
> opt_text);
>
> + struct cl_option optb;
> for (int j = 0; sanitizer_opts[j].name != NULL; ++j)
> {
> - struct cl_option optb;
> /* -fsanitize=all is not valid, only -fno-sanitize=all.
> So don't register the positive misspelling candidates
> for it. */
> --
> 2.45.1
Jakub
@@ -167,9 +167,9 @@ option_proposer::build_option_suggestions (const char *prefix)
add_misspelling_candidates (m_option_suggestions, option,
opt_text);
+ struct cl_option optb;
for (int j = 0; sanitizer_opts[j].name != NULL; ++j)
{
- struct cl_option optb;
/* -fsanitize=all is not valid, only -fno-sanitize=all.
So don't register the positive misspelling candidates
for it. */