This is the mail archive of the mailing list for the glibc 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] Initialize the entire obstack struct [BZ #17919]

On 02/03/2015 12:05 PM, Siddhesh Poyarekar wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 03, 2015 at 11:49:26AM -0500, Carlos O'Donell wrote:
>> IMO zero-initialized padding, for this case, isn't something you can
>> expect. Therefore I think it's a compiler bug.
> Thanks, I've filed a bug now:
>> I think it's OK to work around this in glibc, but it needs a comment
>> with a reference to the filed gcc bug. I do not think it is valid
>> for gcc on s390x to use the entire bit field along with padding and
>> I believe it could result in incorrect operation.
> Nothing is breaking due to this right now, so we could probably wait
> and see what the gcc folks think of this.

I would check it into 2.22 and reference the GCC PR.

However, I see that GCC thinks this is a valgrind bug.

If valgrind is simply looking at the comparison to make
the warning then it falls into the 'false positive' category.
In which case I think Valgrind should set up an exception for
this warning on s390.


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