This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [PATCH] Use libbacktrace as libsanitizer's symbolizer
- From: Ian Lance Taylor <iant at google dot com>
- To: Jakub Jelinek <jakub at redhat dot com>
- Cc: Konstantin Serebryany <kcc at gcc dot gnu dot org>, gcc-patches <gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- Date: Mon, 18 Nov 2013 10:26:58 -0800
- Subject: Re: [PATCH] Use libbacktrace as libsanitizer's symbolizer
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <20131118133930 dot GA892 at tucnak dot redhat dot com> <CAKOQZ8zS+eexJA0b3Wtg3RXDCjE8An_knyrFcymcJoCBwD4=ZQ at mail dot gmail dot com>
On Mon, Nov 18, 2013 at 9:09 AM, Ian Lance Taylor <iant@google.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 18, 2013 at 5:39 AM, Jakub Jelinek <jakub@redhat.com> wrote:
>
>> 3) I wonder if libbacktrace couldn't be updated to use __atomic_* builtins,
>> then it could avoid the ugliness to emulate atomic loads and stores.
>
> I think that would be fine. I can't remember why I didn't use the
> __atomic builtins. Maybe they weren't quite ready at the time.
Wait, I remember the reason. It's because we compile libbacktrace
with the host compiler so that it can be linked with GCC itself, and
it seems premature to assume that the host compiler supports the
__atomic builtins.
Of course we could use configure tests and so forth, but the code to
implement atomic loads using the sync builtins is simple enough that
I'm not sure it's worth it.
Ian