PS: You should have a look at tests/lib/c_lib/src/main.c. Lots of "undefined" stuff being tested in there, including not very useful stuff.
Perhaps you should be more specific pointing to a test that verifies that something expected happens for a behavior that is undefined for the C standard and is not a documented compiler extension.
volatile long long_max = LONG_MAX; volatile long long_one = 1L;
It is an undefined behavior per one of your previous examples. But it passes here because variables are volatile. I still challenge you to point at some gcc extension documentation mentioning that the use of volatile makes two's complement wrap the expected behavior.
I confirm that this is ugly (and dangerous) as hell and I really hope that this is not taken for granted in any part of Zephyr code.
I agree.
Do you really think that the Zephyr comunity wants to play this game, instead to use unsigned when wrapping is wanted?
What would be the profit doing that?
I don't know why that test and a couple others were created. This is demonstrably extremely brittle and untrustworthy.