From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG  Tue Mar 13 13:55:48 2007
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG>
X-Original-To: current@freebsd.org
Delivered-To: freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 20AF316A507;
	Tue, 13 Mar 2007 13:55:48 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from des@des.no)
Received: from tim.des.no (tim.des.no [194.63.250.121])
	by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B649813C4BD;
	Tue, 13 Mar 2007 13:55:34 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from des@des.no)
Received: from tim.des.no (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by spam.des.no (Postfix) with ESMTP id 87118208C;
	Tue, 13 Mar 2007 14:23:53 +0100 (CET)
X-Spam-Tests: AWL
X-Spam-Learn: disabled
X-Spam-Score: 0.0/3.0
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.1.7 (2006-10-05) on tim.des.no
Received: from dwp.des.no (des.no [80.203.243.180])
	by tim.des.no (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6CA8E2089;
	Tue, 13 Mar 2007 14:23:53 +0100 (CET)
Received: by dwp.des.no (Postfix, from userid 1001)
	id 55701B88E; Tue, 13 Mar 2007 14:23:53 +0100 (CET)
From: des@des.no (Dag-Erling =?iso-8859-1?Q?Sm=F8rgrav?=)
To: Andrey Chernov <ache@freebsd.org>
References: <20070313121106.GA96293@nagual.pp.ru>
Date: Tue, 13 Mar 2007 14:23:53 +0100
In-Reply-To: <20070313121106.GA96293@nagual.pp.ru> (Andrey Chernov's message
	of "Tue, 13 Mar 2007 15:11:07 +0300")
Message-ID: <86veh56zva.fsf@dwp.des.no>
User-Agent: Gnus/5.110006 (No Gnus v0.6) Emacs/21.3 (berkeley-unix)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Cc: current@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: Bad gcc -O optimization cause core dump. What to do?
X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current
	<freebsd-current.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current>, 
	<mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-current>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-current@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current>,
	<mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 13 Mar 2007 13:55:48 -0000

Andrey Chernov <ache@freebsd.org> writes:
> Copy the segment below to the file a.c
> ---------------------- cut me here ---------------------
> #include <stdio.h>
>
> main() {
> printf("%s\n", NULL);
> }
> ---------------------- cut me here ---------------------
> [...]
> It calls "puts(NULL)" with core dump.
> It means "printf("%s\n", NULL)" is overoptimized.
> BTW, things like "printf("1%s\n", NULL)" are not overoptimized.
> Any ideas? Is it right or needs to be fixed?

The behaviour of printf("%s\n", NULL) is undefined.  GCC is perfectly
within its rights to translate it into something that dumps core (or
causes your disk to crash, your monitor to explode, your dog to die of
a venereal disease, and demons to fly out of your nose)

Specifically, the C standard (=A77.19.6.1) requires the argument that
corresponds to %s to be a pointer to "the initial element of an array
of character type", which NULL is not.

DES
--=20
Dag-Erling Sm=F8rgrav - des@des.no