public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "eyalroz at technion dot ac.il" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug c++/97553] New: [missed optimization] constexprness not noticed when UBsan enabled
Date: Fri, 23 Oct 2020 16:27:52 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <bug-97553-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> (raw)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97553

            Bug ID: 97553
           Summary: [missed optimization] constexprness not noticed when
                    UBsan enabled
           Product: gcc
           Version: 10.2.0
            Status: UNCONFIRMED
          Severity: normal
          Priority: P3
         Component: c++
          Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
          Reporter: eyalroz at technion dot ac.il
  Target Milestone: ---

(GodBolt example: https://godbolt.org/z/Kvan5c)

Consider the following code:

  #include <string_view>

  constexpr std::string_view f() { return "hello"; }

  static constexpr std::string_view g() {
      auto x { f() };
      return x.substr(1, 3);
  } 

  int foo() { return g().length(); }

if you compile it with flags `--std=c++17 -O3`, it results in a pleasant:

  foo():
          mov     eax, 3
          ret

but if you also enabled undefined-behavior sanitization, i.e. `--std=c++17
-fsanitize=undefined -O3`, then you get a much longer program with UB-related
instrumentation - which is never used.

I'm not sure if it's because some optimizations are disabled with UBsan, in
which case this might be a "misfeature", or whether they're enabled but the
optimization is just missed.

             reply	other threads:[~2020-10-23 16:27 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2020-10-23 16:27 eyalroz at technion dot ac.il [this message]
2020-10-23 16:34 ` [Bug c++/97553] " jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2020-10-26 16:50 ` mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
2020-10-26 19:40 ` eyalroz at technion dot ac.il
2020-10-26 19:45 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2020-10-26 20:46 ` eyalroz at technion dot ac.il
2023-02-17 20:21 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-03-02 19:05 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-04-26 13:18 ` ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org

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-97553-4@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: link
Be 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).