[Bug c++/66487] sanitizer/warnings for lifetime DSE
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66487 --- Comment #30 from Eric Gallager --- (In reply to Eric Gallager from comment #29) > (In reply to Alexander Monakov from comment #28) > > The bug is about the issue of lacking diagnostics, it should be fine to make > > note of various approaches to remedy the problem in one bug report. > > > > OK, well, in this case, I'd like to make this the bug report for MSan > support in general, too, then; it's documented here: > https://github.com/google/sanitizers/wiki/MemorySanitizer ...see also this wiki page, since GCC supports building with libc++ now: https://github.com/google/sanitizers/wiki/MemorySanitizerLibcxxHowTo ...although, be aware that it's outdated, as per this issue: https://github.com/google/sanitizers/issues/1685
[Bug c++/66487] sanitizer/warnings for lifetime DSE
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66487 --- Comment #29 from Eric Gallager --- (In reply to Alexander Monakov from comment #28) > The bug is about the issue of lacking diagnostics, it should be fine to make > note of various approaches to remedy the problem in one bug report. > OK, well, in this case, I'd like to make this the bug report for MSan support in general, too, then; it's documented here: https://github.com/google/sanitizers/wiki/MemorySanitizer (In reply to Martin Liška from comment #20) > (In reply to Jan Hubicka from comment #19) > > Martin, I suppose the sanitizer bits can be tracked as enhancement and not > > regression. It is a firefox bug so I suppose we can declare this a > > non-regression. > > Sure, maybe I would return to support of MSAN in GCC 7. Maybe for GCC 14 now?
[Bug c++/66487] sanitizer/warnings for lifetime DSE
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66487 --- Comment #28 from Alexander Monakov --- The bug is about the issue of lacking diagnostics, it should be fine to make note of various approaches to remedy the problem in one bug report. (in any case, all discussion of the Valgrind-based approach happened on the gcc-patches mailing list, not here)
[Bug c++/66487] sanitizer/warnings for lifetime DSE
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66487 --- Comment #27 from Eric Gallager --- (In reply to Alexander Monakov from comment #26) > RFC patch for detecting lifetime-dse issues via Valgrind (rather than MSan): > https://inbox.sourceware.org/gcc-patches/20231024141124.210708-1-exactl...@ispras.ru/ So, if this bug is now specifically for the valgrind approach, is there a separate one for MSan?
[Bug c++/66487] sanitizer/warnings for lifetime DSE
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66487 Alexander Monakov changed: What|Removed |Added CC||amonakov at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #26 from Alexander Monakov --- RFC patch for detecting lifetime-dse issues via Valgrind (rather than MSan): https://inbox.sourceware.org/gcc-patches/20231024141124.210708-1-exactl...@ispras.ru/
[Bug c++/66487] sanitizer/warnings for lifetime DSE
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66487 Eric Gallager changed: What|Removed |Added See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill ||a/show_bug.cgi?id=66163 CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #25 from Eric Gallager --- this came up on the gcc-help mailing list here: https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-help/2023-August/142848.html
[Bug c++/66487] sanitizer/warnings for lifetime DSE
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66487 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|6.5 |---
[Bug c++/66487] sanitizer/warnings for lifetime DSE
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66487 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|6.4 |6.5 --- Comment #24 from Richard Biener --- GCC 6.4 is being released, adjusting target milestone.
[Bug c++/66487] sanitizer/warnings for lifetime DSE
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66487 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|6.3 |6.4 --- Comment #23 from Jakub Jelinek --- GCC 6.3 is being released, adjusting target milestone.
[Bug c++/66487] sanitizer/warnings for lifetime DSE
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66487 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|6.2 |6.3
[Bug c++/66487] sanitizer/warnings for lifetime DSE
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66487 --- Comment #22 from Richard Biener --- Author: rguenth Date: Mon May 23 10:41:35 2016 New Revision: 236583 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=236583&root=gcc&view=rev Log: 2016-05-23 Richard Biener Backport from mainline 2015-12-11 Segher Boessenkool PR rtl-optimization/68814 * rtlanal.c (set_noop_p): Use BITS_BIG_ENDIAN instead of BYTES_BIG_ENDIAN. 2016-01-12 Jan Hubicka PR lto/69003 * lto-partition.c (rename_statics): Fix pasto. 2016-01-13 Jan Hubicka PR ipa/66487 * ipa-polymorphic-call.c (inlined_polymorphic_ctor_dtor_block_p): use block_ultimate_origin (noncall-stmt_may_be_vtbl_ptr_store): Likewise. 2016-02-08 Jakub Jelinek PR ipa/69239 * g++.dg/ipa/pr69239.C: New test. 2016-01-21 Roman Zhuykov PR target/69252 * modulo-sched.c (optimize_sc): Allow branch-scheduling to add a new first stage. 2016-01-21 Martin Sebor PR target/69252 * gcc.target/powerpc/pr69252.c: New test. Added: branches/gcc-5-branch/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/ipa/pr69239.C branches/gcc-5-branch/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/torture/pr69166.c branches/gcc-5-branch/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/powerpc/pr69252.c Modified: branches/gcc-5-branch/gcc/ChangeLog branches/gcc-5-branch/gcc/ipa-polymorphic-call.c branches/gcc-5-branch/gcc/lto/lto-partition.c branches/gcc-5-branch/gcc/modulo-sched.c branches/gcc-5-branch/gcc/rtlanal.c branches/gcc-5-branch/gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog
[Bug c++/66487] sanitizer/warnings for lifetime DSE
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66487 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|6.0 |6.2 --- Comment #21 from Jakub Jelinek --- GCC 6.1 has been released.
[Bug c++/66487] sanitizer/warnings for lifetime DSE
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66487 --- Comment #20 from Martin Liška --- (In reply to Jan Hubicka from comment #19) > Martin, I suppose the sanitizer bits can be tracked as enhancement and not > regression. It is a firefox bug so I suppose we can declare this a > non-regression. Sure, maybe I would return to support of MSAN in GCC 7.
[Bug c++/66487] sanitizer/warnings for lifetime DSE
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66487 Jan Hubicka changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed||2016-04-06 Summary|[6 Regression] Firefox |sanitizer/warnings for |segfault with LTO enabled |lifetime DSE Ever confirmed|0 |1 Severity|normal |enhancement --- Comment #19 from Jan Hubicka --- Martin, I suppose the sanitizer bits can be tracked as enhancement and not regression. It is a firefox bug so I suppose we can declare this a non-regression.
