>>>> As for warning. I personally would argue that we are looking at >>>> platform-specific i.e. implementation-defined behaviour, not undefined. >>>> Once again, this applies to all three tickets. One is effectively >>>> identical to this one, second is about variable shift in CAST. As >>>> mentioned they all are conscious choices and are proven to work. >> I think Andy is right with respect to processor behavior. But I'm not >> certain if its the best strategy given the C langauge rules. > > What does it mean in practical terms? Would you a) resort to > STRICT_ALIGNMENT at all occasions (arguing that performance benefits > never worth it); b) accept compromise suggestion to adhere to > STRICT_ALIGNMENT in debug-like build, in this case one with -DPEDANTIC?
As nobody weighed in, -DPEDANTIC it is. I.e. if you compile with -fsanitize, you should also add -DPEDANTIC. http://git.openssl.org/gitweb/?p=openssl.git;a=commitdiff;h=021e5043e524b1cb28a929ef902548a987c16e65 As mentioned this applies to tickets #3422-4. ______________________________________________________________________ OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org Development Mailing List openssl-dev@openssl.org Automated List Manager majord...@openssl.org
