From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 15995 invoked by alias); 23 Dec 2012 19:45:31 -0000 Received: (qmail 15842 invoked by uid 48); 23 Dec 2012 19:45:13 -0000 From: "Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot ethz.ch" To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug fortran/55341] address-sanitizer and Fortran Date: Sun, 23 Dec 2012 19:45:00 -0000 X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC X-Bugzilla-Type: changed X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc X-Bugzilla-Component: fortran X-Bugzilla-Keywords: X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal X-Bugzilla-Who: Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot ethz.ch X-Bugzilla-Status: ASSIGNED X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3 X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: jakub at gcc dot gnu.org X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: --- X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: X-Bugzilla-URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/ Auto-Submitted: auto-generated Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" MIME-Version: 1.0 Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org X-SW-Source: 2012-12/txt/msg02271.txt.bz2 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55341 --- Comment #46 from Joost VandeVondele 2012-12-23 19:45:10 UTC --- (In reply to comment #45) > >> The point of failure is not in the object, > >> but in a routine called after a routine from this object finishes. > > What if you remove -fsanitize=address for that single object? Indeed no abort if I drop '-fsanitize=address' from that module. > Your explanation sounds like we are missing some of the return statements in > that routine. > Just speculating... could indeed be that this is what happens. What is surprising is that this seems related to the '-march=corei7' flag.