diff --git a/src/tools/tidy/src/allowed_run_make_makefiles.txt b/src/tools/tidy/src/allowed_run_make_makefiles.txt
index b46fe419269..abe2060fbea 100644
--- a/src/tools/tidy/src/allowed_run_make_makefiles.txt
+++ b/src/tools/tidy/src/allowed_run_make_makefiles.txt
@@ -70,7 +70,6 @@ run-make/reproducible-build-2/Makefile
 run-make/reproducible-build/Makefile
 run-make/rlib-format-packed-bundled-libs-2/Makefile
 run-make/rlib-format-packed-bundled-libs/Makefile
-run-make/sanitizer-staticlib-link/Makefile
 run-make/share-generics-dylib/Makefile
 run-make/simd-ffi/Makefile
 run-make/split-debuginfo/Makefile
diff --git a/tests/run-make/sanitizer-staticlib-link/Makefile b/tests/run-make/sanitizer-staticlib-link/Makefile
deleted file mode 100644
index 7b1a286ed12..00000000000
--- a/tests/run-make/sanitizer-staticlib-link/Makefile
+++ /dev/null
@@ -1,20 +0,0 @@
-# needs-sanitizer-support
-# needs-sanitizer-address
-
-include ../tools.mk
-
-# This test first builds a staticlib with AddressSanitizer and checks that
-# linking it to an executable fails due to the missing sanitizer runtime.
-# It then builds an executable linking to the staticlib and checks that
-# the fault in the staticlib is detected correctly.
-
-# Note that checking for the link failure actually checks two things at once:
-#   1) That the library has the sanitizer intrumentation
-#   2) and that library does not have the sanitizer runtime
-
-all:
-	$(RUSTC) -g -Z sanitizer=address --crate-type staticlib --target $(TARGET) library.rs
-	! $(CC) program.c $(call STATICLIB,library) $(call OUT_EXE,program) $(EXTRACFLAGS) $(EXTRACXXFLAGS)
-	$(RUSTC) -g -Z sanitizer=address --crate-type bin --target $(TARGET) -L . program.rs
-	LD_LIBRARY_PATH=$(TMPDIR) $(TMPDIR)/program 2>&1 | $(CGREP) stack-buffer-overflow
-
diff --git a/tests/run-make/sanitizer-staticlib-link/rmake.rs b/tests/run-make/sanitizer-staticlib-link/rmake.rs
new file mode 100644
index 00000000000..e38d15a8a3c
--- /dev/null
+++ b/tests/run-make/sanitizer-staticlib-link/rmake.rs
@@ -0,0 +1,26 @@
+// This test first builds a staticlib with AddressSanitizer and checks that
+// linking it to an executable fails due to the missing sanitizer runtime.
+// It then builds an executable linking to the staticlib and checks that
+// the fault in the staticlib is detected correctly.
+
+// Note that checking for the link failure actually checks two things at once:
+//   1) That the library has the sanitizer intrumentation
+//   2) and that library does not have the sanitizer runtime
+// See https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/38699
+
+//@ needs-sanitizer-support
+//@ needs-sanitizer-address
+
+use run_make_support::{cc, extra_c_flags, extra_cxx_flags, run_fail, rustc, static_lib_name};
+
+fn main() {
+    rustc().arg("-g").arg("-Zsanitizer=address").crate_type("staticlib").input("library.rs").run();
+    cc().input("program.c")
+        .arg(static_lib_name("library"))
+        .out_exe("program")
+        .args(extra_c_flags())
+        .args(extra_cxx_flags())
+        .run_fail();
+    rustc().arg("-g").arg("-Zsanitizer=address").crate_type("bin").input("program.rs").run();
+    run_fail("program").assert_stderr_contains("stack-buffer-overflow");
+}
diff --git a/tests/run-make/static-dylib-by-default/rmake.rs b/tests/run-make/static-dylib-by-default/rmake.rs
index 70f3815bdef..133210c74e7 100644
--- a/tests/run-make/static-dylib-by-default/rmake.rs
+++ b/tests/run-make/static-dylib-by-default/rmake.rs
@@ -7,19 +7,29 @@
 
 //@ ignore-cross-compile
 // Reason: the compiled binary is executed
-//FIXME(Oneirical): try on msvc, not because of an ignore but because i did wonky things
 
 use run_make_support::{
-    cc, cwd, dynamic_lib_name, extra_c_flags, has_extension, rfs, run, rustc, shallow_find_files,
+    cc, cwd, dynamic_lib_name, extra_c_flags, has_extension, is_msvc, rfs, run, rustc,
+    shallow_find_files,
 };
 
 fn main() {
     rustc().input("foo.rs").run();
     rustc().input("bar.rs").run();
-    cc().input("main.c").out_exe("main").arg(dynamic_lib_name("bar")).args(extra_c_flags()).run();
+    // On msvc, dynamic libraries are compiled by rustc to:
+    // bar.dll     // dylib
+    // bar.dll.lib // import library for the dylib
+    // bar.dll.exp // export library for the dylib
+    // msvc's underlying link.exe requires the import library for the dynamic library as input.
+    // That is why the library is bar.dll.lib, not bar.dll.
+    let library = if is_msvc() { "bar.dll.lib" } else { &dynamic_lib_name("bar") };
+    cc().input("main.c").out_exe("main").arg(library).args(extra_c_flags()).run();
     for rlib in shallow_find_files(cwd(), |path| has_extension(path, "rlib")) {
         rfs::remove_file(rlib);
     }
     rfs::remove_file(dynamic_lib_name("foo"));
+    if is_msvc() {
+        rfs::remove_file("foo.dll.lib");
+    }
     run("main");
 }