This is the mail archive of the gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

[Bug c/85362] unnecessary checks with -fsanitize=object-size and non-int indices


https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85362

Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |jakub at gcc dot gnu.org

--- Comment #1 from Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
This is intentional.  For sanitization we don't want to heavily rely on value
range propagation, because value range propagation is relying on no undefined
behavior occuring in the program and the sanitizer's purpose is exactly catch
undefined behavior in the program.  We don't have 2 sets of value ranges where
one would be extra conservative and another another one what we have right now
where we could use the extra conservative for sanitization.  And by using the
normal value range we would just not detect many undefined behaviors.

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]