[Bug middle-end/68046] -ftrapv doesn't catch leaq-based overflows on x86-64

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68046 Eric Botcazou changed: What|Removed |Added CC||ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org ---

[Bug middle-end/68046] -ftrapv doesn't catch leaq-based overflows on x86-64

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68046 --- Comment #4 from Richard Biener --- Note that -fsanitize-undefined doesn't properly handle volatile int x = __INT_MAX__ + 1; which is in PR61893, it handles the case in this PR fine and with trap-on-error more efficiently than -ftrapv:

[Bug middle-end/68046] -ftrapv doesn't catch leaq-based overflows on x86-64

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68046 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug middle-end/68046] -ftrapv doesn't catch leaq-based overflows on x86-64

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68046 --- Comment #5 from Richard Biener --- Author: rguenth Date: Thu Oct 22 11:44:11 2015 New Revision: 229170 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=229170=gcc=rev Log: 2015-10-22 Richard Biener PR middle-end/68046

[Bug middle-end/68046] -ftrapv doesn't catch leaq-based overflows on x86-64

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68046 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Component|c |middle-end --- Comment #1 from Andrew

[Bug middle-end/68046] -ftrapv doesn't catch leaq-based overflows on x86-64

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68046 --- Comment #2 from joseph at codesourcery dot com --- I wonder if it would be possible to map -ftrapv to something like -fsanitize=signed-integer-overflow -fsanitize-undefined-trap-on-error (whatever is most closely equivalent to -ftrapv and