https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80236
Jonathan Wakely <redi at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|WAITING |UNCONFIRMED
Ever confirmed|1 |0
--- Comment #9 from Jonathan Wakely <redi at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to Dominik Schmidt from comment #8)
> Do you still need a regular gdb backtrace without asan? Looks the same to
> me, but I can provide it anyway.
This is OK.
> `ldd /tmp/crashTest ` prints:
> linux-vdso.so.1 (0x7efa3000)
> libstdc++.so.6 => /usr/lib/libstdc++.so.6 (0x76e10000)
> libm.so.6 => /lib/libm.so.6 (0x76d8f000)
> libgcc_s.so.1 => /lib/libgcc_s.so.1 (0x76d63000)
> libc.so.6 => /lib/libc.so.6 (0x76c27000)
> /lib/ld-linux-armhf.so.3 (0x76f51000)
>
> Yes, I'm pretty sure this is the correct libstdc++.
That was confirmed on IRC:
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 19 Feb 28 18:29 /usr/lib/libstdc++.so.6
-> libstdc++.so.6.0.22
I don't see anything obviously wrong in the libstdc++ code, and can't reproduce
this on x86_64, so it might be a misoptimization.
