https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63888
--- Comment #18 from Kostya Serebryany <kcc at gcc dot gnu.org> --- (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #17) > (In reply to Kostya Serebryany from comment #16) > > Frankly, I realize that I don't understand the subtleties of this problem. > > :( > > > > First, if this is C++ we clearly have a bug (ODR violation) and we are > > done. > > So it is an ODR violation in C++, but you won't report it (remember, the > binary is not instrumented), just it will misbehave (can mark valid memory > of other vars in the binary as poisoned, e.g.). > > > Then, if this is C w/o any extra flags we will not instrument these globals. > > Not true, the vars are initialized, thus are not common. Or the var in the > binary could be common, and the var in the shared library not, etc. > And I've actually verified both clang and gcc instrument it. > > Registering something assuming padding has been added (and aligned) when you > don't have a control on it is just wrong, and the local alias is an very > easy way to avoid it. I am disoriented. Can you please give a full repro (with command lines, etc) where we'll now produce a false positive (in clang or in gcc)?
