From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: by sourceware.org (Postfix, from userid 48) id 407893852C73; Wed, 30 Nov 2022 22:49:34 +0000 (GMT) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 407893852C73 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gcc.gnu.org; s=default; t=1669848574; bh=VD8CGPqXqZdXo+cA0RpnRSL+UBYUoUMCQUtl0oAo348=; h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=mU4/hXxFRL9OAo2SZo6jQvqT9IPDdtnZmduukFPln25yAAvVfBwBvhdxA55QIC4dj 1f4ZentC6ChnVNyjBHvYd08KsUizAVrA/kEBQkdJLYrLUyU8dHgw6bQi3nO+zZvk0V ndT2+XnUkmV4YhqeAKNxqMMzloMTBfEB76LiaKys= From: "laurent.alfonsi at linaro dot org" To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug libstdc++/107940] temp_directory_path testcase broken Date: Wed, 30 Nov 2022 22:49:34 +0000 X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC X-Bugzilla-Type: changed X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc X-Bugzilla-Component: libstdc++ X-Bugzilla-Version: 13.0 X-Bugzilla-Keywords: testsuite-fail X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal X-Bugzilla-Who: laurent.alfonsi at linaro dot org X-Bugzilla-Status: UNCONFIRMED X-Bugzilla-Resolution: X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3 X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: --- X-Bugzilla-Flags: X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Bugzilla-URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/ Auto-Submitted: auto-generated MIME-Version: 1.0 List-Id: https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D107940 --- Comment #4 from laurent.alfonsi at linaro dot org --- (In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #1) > (In reply to laurent.alfonsi@linaro.org from comment #0) > > This may be linked to https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D90= 787. > > But, I confirm my toolchain is based on trunk (13.0), and contains the = 90787 > > fix. >=20 > No, I don't think it's related to that in any way. >=20 > valgrind and asan are both clean when running that test on > x86_64-pc-linux-gnu. >=20 > Where does valgrind say there are uninitialized values? Maybe the problem= is > in the unwinder. Plenty places : "More than 1000 different errors detected" Many are from init phase : =3D=3D47392=3D=3D Conditional jump or move depends on uninitialised value(s) =3D=3D47392=3D=3D at 0x497FB0: malloc=20 =3D=3D47392=3D=3D by 0x4C6E23: _dl_get_origin =3D=3D47392=3D=3D by 0x4B0A0F: _dl_non_dynamic_init =3D=3D47392=3D=3D by 0x4B147B: __libc_init_first =3D=3D47392=3D=3D by 0x469DBB: (below main) Then from the testcase itself (test02):=20 =3D=3D47392=3D=3D Conditional jump or move depends on uninitialised value(s) =3D=3D47392=3D=3D at 0x498034: malloc=20 =3D=3D47392=3D=3D by 0x40C70B: operator new(unsigned long)=20 =3D=3D47392=3D=3D by 0x401923: void std::__cxx11::basic_string, std::allocator >::_M_construct(c= har const*, char const*, std::forward_iterator_tag) [clone .isra.0] =3D=3D47392=3D=3D by 0x4036F3: test02()=20 =3D=3D47392=3D=3D by 0x400DDB: main=20 test03 :=20 =3D=3D47392=3D=3D Conditional jump or move depends on uninitialised value(s) =3D=3D47392=3D=3D at 0x47B6F4: unsetenv=20 =3D=3D47392=3D=3D by 0x403FBF: test03()=20 =3D=3D47392=3D=3D by 0x400DDF: main=