[Bug sanitizer/55577] New: g++.dg/asan/asan_test.C failures

[Bug sanitizer/55577] New: g++.dg/asan/asan_test.C failures

[hjl.tools at gmail dot com]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55577

             Bug #: 55577
           Summary: g++.dg/asan/asan_test.C failures
    Classification: Unclassified
           Product: gcc
           Version: 4.8.0
            Status: UNCONFIRMED
          Severity: normal
          Priority: P3
         Component: sanitizer
        AssignedTo: unassigned@gcc.gnu.org
        ReportedBy: hjl.tools@gmail.com
                CC: dodji@gcc.gnu.org, dvyukov@gcc.gnu.org,
                    jakub@gcc.gnu.org, kcc@gcc.gnu.org


On Linux/x86, revision 194082 gave

FAIL: g++.dg/asan/asan_test.C  -O2  AddressSanitizer_BitFieldPositiveTest
x->bf1 = 0 execution test
FAIL: g++.dg/asan/asan_test.C  -O2  AddressSanitizer_BitFieldPositiveTest
x->bf2 = 0 execution test
FAIL: g++.dg/asan/asan_test.C  -O2  AddressSanitizer_BitFieldPositiveTest
x->bf3 = 0 execution test
FAIL: g++.dg/asan/asan_test.C  -O2  AddressSanitizer_BitFieldPositiveTest
x->bf4 = 0 execution test
FAIL: g++.dg/asan/asan_test.C  -O2  AddressSanitizer_BuiltinLongJmpTest
execution test
FAIL: g++.dg/asan/asan_test.C  -O2  AddressSanitizer_FileNameInGlobalReportTest
Ident(p[15]) execution test
FAIL: g++.dg/asan/asan_test.C  -O2  AddressSanitizer_GlobalStringConstTest
Ident(p[15]) execution test
FAIL: g++.dg/asan/asan_test.C  -O2  AddressSanitizer_GlobalTest fs2[Ident(-1)]
= 0 execution test
FAIL: g++.dg/asan/asan_test.C  -O2  AddressSanitizer_GlobalTest
func_static15[Ident(15 + 9)] = 0 execution test
FAIL: g++.dg/asan/asan_test.C  -O2  AddressSanitizer_GlobalTest
func_static15[Ident(15)] = 0 execution test
FAIL: g++.dg/asan/asan_test.C  -O2  AddressSanitizer_GlobalTest
static110[Ident(110)] = 0 execution test
FAIL: g++.dg/asan/asan_test.C  -O2  AddressSanitizer_GlobalTest
static110[Ident(110+7)] = 0 execution test
FAIL: g++.dg/asan/asan_test.C  -O2  AddressSanitizer_LongJmpTest execution test
FAIL: g++.dg/asan/asan_test.C  -O2  AddressSanitizer_SigLongJmpTest execution
test
FAIL: g++.dg/asan/asan_test.C  -O2  AddressSanitizer_SignalTest *c = 0 output
pattern test, should match AddressSanitizer: SEGV on unknown address
FAIL: g++.dg/asan/asan_test.C  -O2  AddressSanitizer_SignalTest *c = 0 output
pattern test, should match AddressSanitizer: SEGV on unknown address
FAIL: g++.dg/asan/asan_test.C  -O2  AddressSanitizer_ThreadStackReuseTest
execution test
FAIL: g++.dg/asan/asan_test.C  -O2  AddressSanitizer_ThreadedTest
ThreadedTestSpawn() output pattern test, should match Thread T.*created.*Thread
T.*created.*Thread T.*created

[Bug sanitizer/55577] g++.dg/asan/asan_test.C failures

[ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55577

Eric Botcazou <ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|UNCONFIRMED                 |NEW
   Last reconfirmed|                            |2012-12-03
                 CC|                            |ebotcazou at gcc dot
                   |                            |gnu.org
     Ever Confirmed|0                           |1

--- Comment #1 from Eric Botcazou <ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org> 2012-12-03 17:59:17 UTC ---
I have them too.

[Bug sanitizer/55577] g++.dg/asan/asan_test.C failures

[jakub at gcc dot gnu.org]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55577

--- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> 2012-12-03 18:43:58 UTC ---
Everybody has them, I've said in the mail containing the patch that there are a
few unanalyzed failures, and what the reasons for some of those failures are
(e.g. not instrumenting bitfields yet).

[Bug sanitizer/55577] g++.dg/asan/asan_test.C failures

[ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55577

--- Comment #3 from Eric Botcazou <ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org> 2012-12-03 18:48:08 UTC ---
> Everybody has them, I've said in the mail containing the patch that there are a
> few unanalyzed failures, and what the reasons for some of those failures are
> (e.g. not instrumenting bitfields yet).

Ah, sorry.  You can XFAIL them in the meantime though, adding testcases that
don't pass is a bit weird in my opinion.

[Bug sanitizer/55577] g++.dg/asan/asan_test.C failures

[hjl.tools at gmail dot com]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55577

H.J. Lu <hjl.tools at gmail dot com> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|NEW                         |RESOLVED
         Resolution|---                         |FIXED
   Target Milestone|---                         |5.0

--- Comment #5 from H.J. Lu <hjl.tools at gmail dot com> ---
Fixed.