Re: lib/51363: ubsan (undef behaviour sanitizer) faults

[bch <brad.harder%gmail.com@localhost>]

The following reply was made to PR lib/51363; it has been noted by GNATS.

From: bch <brad.harder%gmail.com@localhost>
To: gnats-bugs%netbsd.org@localhost
Cc: lib-bug-people%netbsd.org@localhost, gnats-admin%netbsd.org@localhost, netbsd-bugs%netbsd.org@localhost
Subject: Re: lib/51363: ubsan (undef behaviour sanitizer) faults
Date: Sun, 31 Jul 2016 16:05:58 -0700

 This is something I don't understand --
 
 I'm using clang from pkgsrc, and there are *no* ubsan components
 installed that I can see. The clang documentation says that issuing
 -fsanitize=* might only instrument the code, or require a lib for
 runtime support. W/ the -fsanitize=undefined clang reports that it
 wants to be linked to ubsan, and linking (w/ clang, which is supposed
 to be used to pick the correct ubsan), still links as you see.
 
 -bch
 
 On 7/31/16, David Holland <dholland-bugs%netbsd.org@localhost> wrote:
 > The following reply was made to PR lib/51363; it has been noted by GNATS.
 >
 > From: David Holland <dholland-bugs%netbsd.org@localhost>
 > To: gnats-bugs%NetBSD.org@localhost
 > Cc:
 > Subject: Re: lib/51363: ubsan (undef behaviour sanitizer) faults
 > Date: Sun, 31 Jul 2016 20:25:53 +0000
 >
 >  On Tue, Jul 26, 2016 at 06:50:00PM +0000, bch wrote:
 >   > 	libubsan should trap for undefined behaviour errors and either fail
 >   > gracefully w/i runtime, or continue running the ub-afflicted program.
 >   > My examples demonstrate that it segfaults instead.
 >
 >  The overt thing that I see is:
 >
 >   > CC=clang
 >
 >  and
 >
 >   > /usr/src/external/gpl3/gcc/dist/libsanitizer/ubsan/ubsan_diag.cc
 >                       ^^^^^^^^^^^^^
 >
 >  Shouldn't clang be using clang's sanitizer support library?
 >
 >  --
 >  David A. Holland
 >  dholland%netbsd.org@localhost
 >
 >