On Thu, Jun 05, 2025 at 03:52:21PM -0700, Kees Cook wrote: > On Mon, May 19, 2025 at 11:23:34AM -0700, Kees Cook wrote: > > On Fri, May 16, 2025 at 01:34:14PM +0000, Qing Zhao wrote: > > > Adding -fdiagnotics-details into GCC to provide more hints to the > > > end users on how the warnings come from, in order to help the user > > > to locate the exact location in source code on the specific warnings > > > due to compiler optimizations. > > > > I just needed to examine an unexpected -Wrestrict warning, and > > discovered that this patch didn't help with it, but in looking at the > > implementation details, it turned out to be trivial to expand coverage > > to include -Wrestrict, which worked for me, and got me the > > diagnostics I needed[1]. > > I found another case[1] where I didn't get detailed diagnostics, so I > tried to instrument that too, but it didn't do anything. Here's the patch > (trying to get more coverage for stringop-overflow), but I don't know > what I did wrong:
I think this may be a known bug. It looks very similar to this: https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97490 and is somehow related to -fsanitize=kernel-address -- Kees Cook
