public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "muecker at gwdg dot de" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org> To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug middle-end/99797] accessing uninitialized automatic variables Date: Mon, 19 Apr 2021 18:57:46 +0000 [thread overview] Message-ID: <bug-99797-4-RlVnxmPSym@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> (raw) In-Reply-To: <bug-99797-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99797 --- Comment #11 from Martin Uecker <muecker at gwdg dot de> --- (In reply to Ivan Sorokin from comment #10) ... > > is a bug if this choice is unreasonable and does not serve its users well. > > Do you have some specific proposal in mind? > > Currently a user has these 5 options: > 1. Using -O0 suppressing optimizations. > 2. Using -fno-tree-ccp suppressing this specific optimization. Optimizations are important, so this is not really an option. > 3. Using -Wall and relying on warnings. It is not clear to me that this fully addresses the problem. GCC does not warn about all possible accesses to uninitialized variables. > 4. (in theory) Using static analyzer -fanalyzer. It doesn't detect this error > at the moment, but I believe can be taught detecting this. This may be helpful. > 5. Using dynamic analyzer like valgrind. This is too expensive for production and also only useful for limited testing. > It seems that you find existing options insufficient and want another one. I want the optimizer to assume that uninitialized variables have an unknown but fixed value. Then one could still optimize almost as well *and* get analyzable and more benign behavior even when uninitialized variables are accessed. Optimizers already know how to deal with variables of unknown content, so this should be fairly easy to implement (maybe I will try). I would also like something such as -fsanitize=undefined which detects for uninitialized variables at run-time. Best, Martin
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-04-19 18:57 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top 2021-03-27 13:47 [Bug c/99797] New: " muecker at gwdg dot de 2021-03-27 19:19 ` [Bug c/99797] " pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org 2021-03-27 19:19 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org 2021-03-28 6:32 ` muecker at gwdg dot de 2021-03-28 7:08 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org 2021-03-28 7:16 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org 2021-03-30 6:35 ` muecker at gwdg dot de 2021-04-14 20:18 ` muecker at gwdg dot de 2021-04-18 18:09 ` [Bug middle-end/99797] " pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org 2021-04-19 5:43 ` muecker at gwdg dot de 2021-04-19 10:43 ` vanyacpp at gmail dot com 2021-04-19 18:57 ` muecker at gwdg dot de [this message] 2021-04-20 15:20 ` msebor 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-99797-4-RlVnxmPSym@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).