[Bug 1123588]

[Rguenther-suse]

On Mon, 18 Feb 2013, jakub at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:

> 
> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56301
> 
> Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
> 
>            What    |Removed                     |Added
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>                  CC|                            |jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
> 
> --- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> 2013-02-18 13:31:28 UTC ---
> Well, perhaps we need to improve documentation, because for calloc the memory
> doesn't have undefined contents either, it is well defined to be all zeros.

Well, it points to nothing ;)  The bug here is that probably
job_new links the allocated memory into some global list or so,
so it's not about initializing the memory but the fact that it
_is_ aliased by other things.

Yes, we can probably give a few examples of what is not appropriate
use of 'malloc'.

Do you think I should revert the patch on the branch nevertheless?
(it was a fix for a missed-optimization regression only ...)

-- 
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Foundations Bugs, which is subscribed to upstart in Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1123588

Title:
   [4.7 Regression] wrong code with the fix for PR53844

Status in The GNU Compiler Collection:
  Invalid
Status in “gcc-4.7” package in Ubuntu:
  Invalid
Status in “upstart” package in Ubuntu:
  Triaged
Status in “gcc-4.7” source package in Raring:
  Invalid
Status in “upstart” source package in Raring:
  Triaged

Bug description:
  seen with -21ubuntu1, not with -20ubuntu1, reverting the fix for
  PR53844 avoids the issue.

  I think we need a reproducer in upstart, which doesn't just hang.

To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/gcc/+bug/1123588/+subscriptions