Optimization bug?

[SÃren Brinkmann <soren dot brinkmann at xilinx dot com>]

Hi,

I recently came across some bug in my program that I could narrow down
to the snipped below (also attached with a Makefile).

  extern unsigned int _vector_table;

  int main(void)
  {
  	unsigned int *vector_base = &_vector_table;

  	if (vector_base == 0) {
  		return 1;
  	} else {
  		return 2;
  	}
  }

The code generated for this function is (I tested a couple of different
compilers and architectures (4.7, 4.9 and 5.2)):
  0000000000000000 <main>:
     0:	b8 02 00 00 00       	mov    $0x2,%eax
     5:	c3                   	retq   

If my understanding is correct, this is a legal optimization under the
assumption that no object may reside at address 0, resulting in the
optimized out if branch.
Though, my understanding is that the switch
'-fno-delete-null-pointer-checks' would remove that assumption allowing
such code to be compiled "correctly" (I'm on an embedded system and code
at 0 is actually important).

Could somebody tell me what the correct way for implementing something
like that would be? Or whether this is actually a gcc issue?

	Thanks,
	SÃren

extern unsigned int _vector_table;

int main(void)
{
	unsigned int *vector_base = &_vector_table;

	if (vector_base == 0) {
		return 1;
	} else {
		return 2;
	}
}

Attachment: Makefile
Description: Text document