[Bug sanitizer/55309] gcc's address-sanitizer 66% slower than clang's

[jakub at gcc dot gnu.org]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55309

--- Comment #11 from Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> 2013-02-05 10:54:46 UTC ---
I really don't like the blacklist hack, such changes belong to the source, not
outside of it.  If you want to disable instrumentation of SATD, I think
modification of the source is preferrable, or I guess you can
use
echo > buggy-spec-workarounds.h <<\EOF
extern int SATD (int *, int) __attribute__((__no_address_safety_analysis__));
EOF
and use -include .../buggy-spec-workarounds.h, though of course if it is a real
bug in SPEC, it would be much better to just report it to SPEC and hope they
fix it up.  Though given http://www.spec.org/cpu2006/Docs/faq.html#Run.05 I
don't have much hope they will (when they even don't see it as C89 violation).