https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105614
--- Comment #14 from Xi Ruoyao <xry111 at gcc dot gnu.org> --- (In reply to Chris Packham from comment #13) > (In reply to Xi Ruoyao from comment #12) > > Please provide info about how libsanitizer end up building with GCC 11.3 and > > MIPS64 (such a combination is not supported and libsanitizer should not be > > enabled automatically with it). > > Original user report was > https://github.com/crosstool-ng/crosstool-ng/issues/1733 > > In that case the user specifically enabled LIBSANITZER support so > --enable-libsanitizer was passed to GCC's configure. > > Based on what you're saying we should gate the LIBSANITZER on the > architecture and GCC version. We do that for some options but LIBSANITZER is > just enabled or disabled. We should probably also have LIBSANITZER tristate > so we can let GCC decide to enable it if the stars align. I think you can just put a warning like "enabling libsanitizer for unsupported targets may break the build or produce unusable libsanitizer". I guess a similar warning should be added into gcc configure.ac as well.
