https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65285
--- Comment #8 from Kostya Serebryany <kcc at gcc dot gnu.org> --- (In reply to Peter Wu from comment #7) > (In reply to Kostya Serebryany from comment #6) > > > How does your GCC behave with the test case? The sanitizer code in GCC is > > > imported from Clang, I believe, so it probably does not crash either? > > > > I get this: > > ~/gcc-inst/bin/gcc -fsanitize=address -static-libasan d.c && ./a.out > > AddressSanitizer can not describe address in more detail (wild memory access > > suspected). > > I guess this is better than crashing. Is it possible to report something > better? Can't it at least report the type and address? Since asan does not instrument this global it knows nothing about it. Sure, it is possible to provide better diagnostic, but this is nowhere near the top of the things we are planing to work on. Frankly, this looks like a relatively low value feature. > > > Did you check the GCC trunk? > > It took a while to get the build environment, but now I can confirm that I > see the same wild memory access error (tested with r221125). Let me double-check with the fresh GCC trunk. Does fresh Clang trunk work for you?
