From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 3706 invoked by alias); 26 Dec 2013 05:04:00 -0000 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 Received: (qmail 3623 invoked by uid 48); 26 Dec 2013 05:03:56 -0000 From: "y.gribov at samsung dot com" To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug sanitizer/59600] no_sanitize_address mishandled when function is inlined Date: Thu, 26 Dec 2013 05:04:00 -0000 X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC X-Bugzilla-Type: changed X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc X-Bugzilla-Component: sanitizer X-Bugzilla-Version: 4.8.2 X-Bugzilla-Keywords: X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal X-Bugzilla-Who: y.gribov at samsung dot com X-Bugzilla-Status: UNCONFIRMED 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: cc attachments.created Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Bugzilla-URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/ Auto-Submitted: auto-generated MIME-Version: 1.0 X-SW-Source: 2013-12/txt/msg02177.txt.bz2 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59600 Yury Gribov changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |y.gribov at samsung dot com --- Comment #1 from Yury Gribov --- Created attachment 31515 --> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=31515&action=edit Draft patch Fails for me as well. Given that Asan runs long after inliner this behavior is expected. Perhaps it makes sense to prohibit inline for unsanitized functions? We'll loose some performance but no_sanitize_address semantics would be more transparent for users. Here's a crude patch which seems to fix repro and also show no regressions for `make check-c RUNTESTFLAGS=asan.exp'.