public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "iains at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org> To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug c++/114663] New: Several contracts test cases fail with -fsanitize=undefined -fsanitize-trap Date: Tue, 09 Apr 2024 18:42:05 +0000 [thread overview] Message-ID: <bug-114663-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> (raw) https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114663 Bug ID: 114663 Summary: Several contracts test cases fail with -fsanitize=undefined -fsanitize-trap Product: gcc Version: 14.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywords: testsuite-fail, wrong-code Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: c++ Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: iains at gcc dot gnu.org CC: jason at gcc dot gnu.org Target Milestone: --- I found this while working on -funreachable-traps (but the failure equally occurs with -fsanitize=undefined -fsanitize-trap) FAIL: g++.dg/contracts/contracts10.C execution test FAIL: g++.dg/contracts/contracts18.C execution test FAIL: g++.dg/contracts/contracts19.C execution test FAIL: g++.dg/contracts/contracts2.C execution test Initial analysis is that somehow the lowering of the contracts code is exploiting UB [which has a large measure of irony if true] to make these cases pass, for example contracts2.C optimised tree dump contains: ;; Function main (main, funcdef_no=0, decl_uid=2531, cgraph_uid=1, symbol_order=0) int main () { int x; int D.2551; const struct D.2542; int _2; <bb 2> : x_1 = 1; if (x_1 < 0) goto <bb 4>; [INV] else goto <bb 3>; [INV] <bb 3> : __builtin_unreachable (); <bb 4> : if (x_1 <= 0) goto <bb 5>; [INV] else goto <bb 6>; [INV] <bb 5> : ===== When (default) the __builtin_unreachable () is replaced with nothing (i.e. it falls though) the test case passes. When we replace the __builtin_unreachable () with a trap (either using the ubsan or -funreachable-traps style) the test case fails with the trap. This seems to be unlikely to be what was intended (or if it was intended it's terribly fragile); I'm labelling it wrong code for now. Similar code patterns exist in the other cases mentioned.
reply other threads:[~2024-04-09 18:42 UTC|newest] Thread overview: [no followups] expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed
Reply instructions: You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email using any one of the following methods: * Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client, and reply-to-all from there: mbox Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style * Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to switches of git-send-email(1): git send-email \ --in-reply-to=bug-114663-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/ \ --to=gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org \ --cc=gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org \ /path/to/YOUR_REPLY https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html * If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header via mailto: links, try the mailto: linkBe sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox; as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).