[Bug sanitizer/109308] False positive store to address 0x62600000016c with insufficient space for an object of type 'int' since r12-6030-g422f9eb7011b76c1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109308 Martin Liška changed: What|Removed |Added See Also||https://sourceware.org/bugz ||illa/show_bug.cgi?id=30279 Ever confirmed|0 |1 Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed||2023-03-28
[Bug sanitizer/109308] False positive store to address 0x62600000016c with insufficient space for an object of type 'int' since r12-6030-g422f9eb7011b76c1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109308 --- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski --- Doing: --opc; On an address which starts an array is undefined. Even for an a memory allocated by malloc.
[Bug sanitizer/109308] False positive store to address 0x62600000016c with insufficient space for an object of type 'int' since r12-6030-g422f9eb7011b76c1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109308 Martin Liška changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|--- |INVALID --- Comment #2 from Martin Liška --- Thus invalid.
[Bug sanitizer/109308] False positive store to address 0x62600000016c with insufficient space for an object of type 'int' since r12-6030-g422f9eb7011b76c1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109308 --- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski --- This code is very much undefined. THe original code did: opc = XNEWVEC (struct m68hc11_opcode_def, num_opcodes); m68hc11_opcode_defs = opc--; Which is definitely undefined. You cannot take the address before the allocated memory and have it be defined. The only address which is valid is where the array starts and one element past the allocation.
[Bug sanitizer/109308] False positive store to address 0x62600000016c with insufficient space for an object of type 'int' since r12-6030-g422f9eb7011b76c1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109308 Alan Modra changed: What|Removed |Added CC||amodra at gmail dot com --- Comment #4 from Alan Modra --- I agree the code is undefined, but "store to address 0x004172b0 with insufficient space for an object of type 'long int'" is a lie. There plainly *is* sufficient space at that address. It would be nice to diagnose the actual undefined behaviour. As a compiler developer you might have the mindset of "it's undefined code so the compiler can do anything", but that argument strikes me as disingenuous when we are talking about -fsanitize=undefined!
[Bug sanitizer/109308] False positive store to address 0x62600000016c with insufficient space for an object of type 'int' since r12-6030-g422f9eb7011b76c1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109308 --- Comment #5 from Siddhesh Poyarekar --- This kinda has happened before: https://github.com/Perl/perl5/issues/20678 Should we keep this bug open for the message, which is obviously wrong?
