From: Erik Faye-Lund <kusmabite@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 05 Oct 2010 07:26:26 GMT
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] do not depend on signed integer overflow
Message-ID: <AANLkTimdaghq5_vcb+7Anh_05oLJUbZuNXU47YWdBudq@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <alpine.LFD.2.00.1010050012490.3107@xanadu.home>

On Tue, Oct 5, 2010 at 6:17 AM, Nicolas Pitre <nico@fluxnic.net> wrote:
> On Tue, 5 Oct 2010, Erik Faye-Lund wrote:
>
>> Signed integer overflow is not defined in C, so do not depend on it.
>>
>> This fixes a problem with GCC 4.4.0 and -O3 where the optimizer would
>> consider "consumed_bytes > consumed_bytes + bytes" as a constant
>> expression, and never execute the die()-call.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Erik Faye-Lund <kusmabite@gmail.com>
>
> I like this.  Please also fix the similar case in
> builtin/pack-objects.c:write_one().
>

Thanks for pointing that one out. For some reason GCC didn't warn
about that instance - perhaps it's optimizer missed the case due to
going through that pointer?

I've just resent a version with that fix-up.