Hello, we ran into an issue with the following (rather benign) C++ snippet:
#include <atomic> #include <mutex> struct Foo { void Bar() ; std::mutex some_lock; std::atomic<uint8_t> some_number; }; void Foo::Bar() { some_lock.lock(); some_number++; some_lock.unlock(); } When compiling this with a recent GCC on Linux (!) with the following flags g++ -fsanitize=undefined -O2 -Werror -c test.cpp -o test.o The following error is thrown: In member function ‘std::__atomic_base<_IntTp>::__int_type std::__atomic_base<_IntTp>::fetch_add(__int_type, std::memory_order) [with _ITp = unsigned char]’, inlined from ‘std::__atomic_base<_IntTp>::__int_type std::__atomic_base<_IntTp>::operator++(int) [with _ITp = unsigned char]’ at /usr/include/c++/12/bits/atomic_base.h:369:25, inlined from ‘void Foo::Bar()’ at test.cpp:13:13: /usr/include/c++/12/bits/atomic_base.h:618:34: error: ‘unsigned char __atomic_fetch_add_1(volatile void*, unsigned char, int)’ writing 1 byte into a region of size 0 overflows the destination [-Werror=stringop-overflow=] 618 | { return __atomic_fetch_add(&_M_i, __i, int(__m)); } | ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Interestingly, the error disappears with -O0 or -O1 which makes me think it's a bug related to optimization. Thanks Hannes