https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102317
--- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> --- That doesn't make sense. -fsanitize=signed-integer-overflow also removes that undefined behavior by defining what happens on signed integer overflow, one can choose whether to get a non-fatal runtime diagnostic + wrapv behavior, or fatal runtime diagnostic, or just abort. So, when you use -fsanitize=signed-integer-overflow, you don't want -fwrapv or -fno-strict-overflow, unless you want the former to be basically a nop.
