Hello,
On 2017-04-19 19:31, Dan Kennedy wrote:
If you compile the code below with gcc 7.0.1:
gcc code.c -fsantitize=address -o tst
and then run:
./tst 2
Does the sanitizer make the same complaint?
[...]
/**********************************************/
[...]
switch( a ){
case 1: {
int res;
b = 1;
case 2:
res = b;
c = res;
break;
}
}
[...]
/**********************************************/
IMHO, ``res'' will not be even protruded to the sanitizer. ``vdbe.c''s
code is using a pointer to ``res'', passing it as a parameter -- thus
SQLite's ``res'' is handled by use-after-scope sanitizer, while ``pC''
and ``pCrsr'' are not.
It looks that GCC forgets to unpoison ``res'' for some reason. Looking
at the GCC's test cases I would suggest: (a) to place label
``OP_SeekRowid'' just after declarations (i.e. after ``u64 iKey;'',
and/or (b) to enclose ``case OP_NotExists:''...``break;'' into a nested,
inner block, and/or (c) to open the block _before_ ``case OP_SeekRowid:''.
Unfortunately, ``gcc-7-branch'' still is decompressing on my hardware,
so I cannot check which one(s) of above (a), (b), (c) will help.
Regardless of all, the original problem concerns GCC rather then SQLite
itself.
-- best regards
Cezary H. Noweta
_______________________________________________
sqlite-users mailing list
[email protected]
http://mailinglists.sqlite.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sqlite-users
