Re: [PATCH] Don't override operator new if GDB is built with -fsanitize=address

[Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com>]

On 10/25/2016 11:38 AM, Pedro Alves wrote:
> How about this follow up?

On 10/25/2016 11:38 AM, Pedro Alves wrote:

> +++ b/gdb/common/new-op.c
> @@ -33,6 +33,12 @@
>     new-handler function instead (std::set_new_handler) because we want
>     to catch allocation errors from within global constructors too.
>  +   Skip overriding if building with -fsanitize=address though.
> +   Address sanitizer wants to override operator new/delete too in

Bah, looks like "edit as new" with Thunderbird messed
up the patch...  Here it is again...

From e58eb16a5f27b1ee39c45642a80da7364763a07b Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com>
Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2016 11:20:03 +0100
Subject: [PATCH] new-op.c: Add comment about -fsanitize=address

gdb/ChangeLog:
2016-10-25  Pedro Alves  <palves@redhat.com>

	* common/new-op.c: Add comment about -fsanitize=address.
---
 gdb/common/new-op.c | 6 ++++++
 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+)

diff --git a/gdb/common/new-op.c b/gdb/common/new-op.c
index f04c5cb..1eb4f94 100644
--- a/gdb/common/new-op.c
+++ b/gdb/common/new-op.c
@@ -33,6 +33,12 @@
    new-handler function instead (std::set_new_handler) because we want
    to catch allocation errors from within global constructors too.
 
+   Skip overriding if building with -fsanitize=address though.
+   Address sanitizer wants to override operator new/delete too in
+   order to detect malloc+delete and new+free mismatches.  Our
+   versions would mask out ASan's, with the result of losing that
+   useful mismatch detection.
+
    Note that C++ implementations could either have their throw
    versions call the nothrow versions (libstdc++), or the other way
    around (clang/libc++).  For that reason, we replace both throw and
-- 
2.5.5