Memory sanitizer reports use-of-uninitialized-value in global object construction

Question

I get use-of-uninitialized-value warning while executing the following program compiled with clang++-9 -fsanitize=memory:

#include <map>

class msan_test
{
  std::map<int, int> m_map;

public:
  msan_test()
  {
    m_map.insert(std::make_pair(1, 1));
    m_map.insert(std::make_pair(2, 2));
  }
};

msan_test gobj; // global object of above class

int main()
{
  return 0;
}

This is the warning I get:

==16598==WARNING: MemorySanitizer: use-of-uninitialized-value
    #0 0x49898f in std::_Rb_tree<int, std::pair<int const, int>, std::_Select1st<std::pair<int const, int> >, std::less<int>, std::allocator<std::pair<int const, int> > >::_M_get_insert_unique_pos(int const&) (/home/noname/a.out+0x49898f)
    #1 0x49828e in std::pair<std::_Rb_tree_iterator<std::pair<int const, int> >, bool> std::_Rb_tree<int, std::pair<int const, int>, std::_Select1st<std::pair<int const, int> >, std::less<int>, std::allocator<std::pair<int const, int> > >::_M_emplace_unique<std::pair<int, int> >(std::pair<int, int>&&) (/home/noname/a.out+0x49828e)
    #2 0x497a7e in std::enable_if<is_constructible<std::pair<int const, int>, std::pair<int, int> >::value, std::pair<std::_Rb_tree_iterator<std::pair<int const, int> >, bool> >::type std::map<int, int, std::less<int>, std::allocator<std::pair<int const, int> > >::insert<std::pair<int, int> >(std::pair<int, int>&&) (/home/noname/a.out+0x497a7e)
    #3 0x49785a in msan_test::msan_test() (/home/noname/a.out+0x49785a)
    #4 0x41be52 in __cxx_global_var_init (/home/noname/a.out+0x41be52)
    #5 0x41beb8 in _GLOBAL__sub_I_memsan.cpp (/home/noname/a.out+0x41beb8)
    #6 0x49bcbc in __libc_csu_init (/home/noname/a.out+0x49bcbc)
    #7 0x7f5db517db27 in __libc_start_main /build/glibc-OTsEL5/glibc-2.27/csu/../csu/libc-start.c:266
    #8 0x41bee9 in _start (/home/noname/a.out+0x41bee9)

SUMMARY: MemorySanitizer: use-of-uninitialized-value (/home/noname/a.out+0x49898f) in std::_Rb_tree<int, std::pair<int const, int>, std::_Select1st<std::pair<int const, int> >, std::less<int>, std::allocator<std::pair<int const, int> > >::_M_get_insert_unique_pos(int const&)
Exiting

Is this a false positive or something deep is going on?

Thanks.

The canonical answer to this would be "don't use global variables, ever" I suppose. — Bartek Banachewicz
– Bartek Banachewicz, Commented Feb 6, 2020 at 14:36
@idclev463035818 You can reproduce it becasuse of godbolt. coliru reproduces the results: coliru.stacked-crooked.com/a/2f8fbd89d661fb76 — NathanOliver
– NathanOliver, Commented Feb 6, 2020 at 14:42
@BartekBanachewicz While globals should be avoided, the sanitiser is triggered even if you use a local. — eerorika
– eerorika, Commented Feb 6, 2020 at 14:47
This shorter example without globals also generates use-of-uninitialized-value warning: coliru.stacked-crooked.com/a/26452112448b24fe — ks1322
– ks1322, Commented Feb 6, 2020 at 15:02

ks1322 · Accepted Answer · 2020-02-06 15:44:18Z

2

This is probably already reported MemorySanitizer bug https://github.com/google/sanitizers/issues/542.

However it was closed with Status WontFix without much explanation.

It seems that you need to build instrumented C++ standard library to avoid false positives. From MemorySanitizer wiki:

If you want MemorySanitizer to work properly and not produce any false positives, you must ensure that all the code in your program and in libraries it uses is instrumented (i.e. built with -fsanitize=memory). In particular, you would need to link against MSan-instrumented C++ standard library. We recommend to use libc++ for that purpose.

edited Feb 6, 2020 at 15:44

answered Feb 6, 2020 at 15:22

ks1322

36.4k16 gold badges124 silver badges177 bronze badges

Sign up to request clarification or add additional context in comments.

Comments

eerorika · Accepted Answer · 2020-02-06 14:51:48Z

0

Is this a false positive or something deep is going on?

Either this is false positive in the sanitiser, or the standard library implementation has a bug.

There is no reading of uninitialised value in the shown program.

answered Feb 6, 2020 at 14:51

eerorika

240k13 gold badges212 silver badges354 bronze badges

1 Comment

Sam Varshavchik Over a year ago

Not necessarily. For example: stackoverflow.com/questions/3246008/…

Collectives™ on Stack Overflow

Memory sanitizer reports use-of-uninitialized-value in global object construction

2 Answers 2

Comments

1 Comment

Your Answer

Linked

Hot Network Questions

Collectives™ on Stack Overflow

2 Answers 2

Comments

1 Comment

Your Answer

Sign up or log in

Post as a guest

Linked

Related