[Bug analyzer/117662] Weird -fanalyzer behavior with code split across multiple files

2024-11-18 Thread frantisek at sumsal dot cz via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117662 Frantisek Sumsal changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |WORKSFORME Status|UNCONF

[Bug analyzer/117662] Weird -fanalyzer behavior with code split across multiple files

2024-11-18 Thread frantisek at sumsal dot cz via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117662 --- Comment #1 from Frantisek Sumsal --- And, of course, I forgot to provide the gcc version. I use the gcc-latest build from copr.fedorainfracloud.org/dmalcolm/gcc-latest on Fedora 40, i.e.: $ /opt/gcc-latest/bin/gcc --version gcc (GCC) 15.0.0

[Bug analyzer/117662] New: Weird -fanalyzer behavior with code split across multiple files

2024-11-18 Thread frantisek at sumsal dot cz via Gcc-bugs
Priority: P3 Component: analyzer Assignee: dmalcolm at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: frantisek at sumsal dot cz Target Milestone: --- Hey, As Fedora started recently utilizing gcc's static analyzer through OpenScanHub, I started going through results for the sy

[Bug c/104367] New: Possible improvements for -Wmisleading-indentation

2022-02-03 Thread frantisek at sumsal dot cz via Gcc-bugs
Component: c Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: frantisek at sumsal dot cz Target Milestone: --- Hello! Recently we encountered a pretty nasty bug in systemd[0], which makes me wonder if this situation couldn't be prevented by throwing a compiler warning. # cat

[Bug sanitizer/95279] UBSan doesn't seem to detect pointer overflow in certain cases

2020-05-25 Thread frantisek at sumsal dot cz
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95279 --- Comment #7 from Frantisek Sumsal --- Maybe I'm missing something here, but isn't detecting pointer overflows (even in cases where it's apparently not an undefined behavior) the sole purpose of -fsanitize=pointer-overflow (which, to my knowled

[Bug sanitizer/95275] Possible performance regression in libasan with detect_stack_use_after_return=1

2020-05-23 Thread frantisek at sumsal dot cz
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95275 --- Comment #2 from Frantisek Sumsal --- Slight update of the reproducer - the fetch & checkout is no longer necessary as the required changes were merged into master.

[Bug sanitizer/95279] UBSan doesn't seem to detect pointer overflow in certain cases

2020-05-23 Thread frantisek at sumsal dot cz
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95279 --- Comment #3 from Frantisek Sumsal --- Original issue: https://github.com/systemd/systemd/issues/15583 Patch: https://github.com/systemd/systemd/pull/15860 Code in question: https://github.com/systemd/systemd/blob/master/src/libsystemd/sd-bus/b

[Bug sanitizer/95279] New: UBSan doesn't seem to detect pointer overflow in certain cases

2020-05-22 Thread frantisek at sumsal dot cz
ormal Priority: P3 Component: sanitizer Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: frantisek at sumsal dot cz CC: dodji at gcc dot gnu.org, dvyukov at gcc dot gnu.org, jakub at gcc dot gnu.org, kcc at gcc dot gnu.org, marx

[Bug sanitizer/95275] Possible performance regression in libasan with detect_stack_use_after_return=1

2020-05-22 Thread frantisek at sumsal dot cz
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95275 --- Comment #1 from Frantisek Sumsal --- Created attachment 48582 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=48582&action=edit perf call graph Attaching a perf call graph screenshot (as the text one got shattered by formatting).

[Bug sanitizer/95275] New: Possible performance regression in libasan with detect_stack_use_after_return=1

2020-05-22 Thread frantisek at sumsal dot cz
: normal Priority: P3 Component: sanitizer Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: frantisek at sumsal dot cz CC: dodji at gcc dot gnu.org, dvyukov at gcc dot gnu.org, jakub at gcc dot gnu.org, kcc at gcc dot gnu.org

[Bug sanitizer/91101] Possible performance regression in libasan with detect_stack_use_after_return=1

2019-07-10 Thread frantisek at sumsal dot cz
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91101 --- Comment #17 from Frantisek Sumsal --- Thanks a lot for the thorough debugging and explanation. I raised an issue on the systemd bug tracker[0] so it can be properly discussed and resolved there. [0] https://github.com/systemd/systemd/issues/

[Bug sanitizer/91101] Possible performance regression in libasan with detect_stack_use_after_return=1

2019-07-08 Thread frantisek at sumsal dot cz
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91101 --- Comment #7 from Frantisek Sumsal --- (In reply to Martin Liška from comment #6) > Do you know how to tell meson to use CC=gcc-8? > $ export CC=gcc-8 CXX=g++-8 $ meson build ... should suffice

[Bug sanitizer/91101] Possible performance regression in libasan with detect_stack_use_after_return=1

2019-07-08 Thread frantisek at sumsal dot cz
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91101 --- Comment #5 from Frantisek Sumsal --- (In reply to Martin Liška from comment #4) > Ok, I was able to make the build: > > $ meson build -Db_sanitize=address,undefined -Dxkbcommon=false > > with GCC 9.1.1: > > real 0m2.176s > user 0m2.013s

[Bug sanitizer/91101] Possible performance regression in libasan with detect_stack_use_after_return=1

2019-07-06 Thread frantisek at sumsal dot cz
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91101 --- Comment #3 from Frantisek Sumsal --- ltrace stastistics: # WITH sanitizers and detect_stack_use_after_return=1 [vagrant@arch build]$ export ASAN_OPTIONS=strict_string_checks=1:detect_stack_use_after_return=1:check_initialization_order=1:str

[Bug sanitizer/91101] Possible performance regression in libasan with detect_stack_use_after_return=1

2019-07-06 Thread frantisek at sumsal dot cz
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91101 --- Comment #2 from Frantisek Sumsal --- Created attachment 46569 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=46569&action=edit test-conf-parser.i tempfile from GCC 9.1.0 (compressed due to size)

[Bug sanitizer/91101] Possible performance regression in libasan with detect_stack_use_after_return=1

2019-07-06 Thread frantisek at sumsal dot cz
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91101 --- Comment #1 from Frantisek Sumsal --- Created attachment 46568 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=46568&action=edit hwdb.i tempfile from GCC 9.1.0

[Bug sanitizer/91101] New: Possible performance regression in libasan with detect_stack_use_after_return=1

2019-07-06 Thread frantisek at sumsal dot cz
: normal Priority: P3 Component: sanitizer Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: frantisek at sumsal dot cz CC: dodji at gcc dot gnu.org, dvyukov at gcc dot gnu.org, jakub at gcc dot gnu.org, kcc at gcc dot