Re: [RFC PATCH] Merge libsanitizer from upstream

[Kamil Rytarowski <n54 at gmx dot com>]

On 19.10.2017 13:17, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 19, 2017 at 02:07:24PM +0300, Maxim Ostapenko wrote:
>>> Is the patch (the merge + this incremental) ok for trunk?
>>
>> I think the patch is OK, just wondering about two things:
> 
> Richi just approved the patch on IRC, so I'll commit, then we can deal with
> follow-ups.
> 
>> 1) We have a bunch of GCC local patches, did you include them into a
>> cumulative patch (I guess yes)?
> 
> I have done some verification today, diff from upstream r285547 to unpatched
> GCC (with the LLVM Compiler infrastructure two liners removed), attached P1,
> and diff from upstream r315899 to patched GCC (again, two liners removed),
> attached P2 and went through the changes in P1 and verified that except for
> the ubsan backwards compatibility we had that can't work anymore everything
> else was upstreamed, or remained in P2.  So P2 is the current diff from
> upstream, with the sanitizer_common/sanitizer_symbolizer_libbacktrace.cc
> changes now filed upstream.
> 
>> 2) Upstream has enabled LSan for x86 and ARM, is it worth to enable them in
>> GCC too?
> 
> Maybe, feel free to post patches.  For LSan we need to split off lsan_preinit
> out of liblsan and link it into executables, will handle it next (there is a
> PR about it, just wanted to wait until the merge is in).
> 
> 	Jakub
> 

NetBSD/amd64 ships now with asan, ubsan, libfuzzer (WIP) and safestack
upstreamed.

tsan is work-in-progress and it will be followed by msan.

"make check-tsan" with local patches results so far:

Expected Passes    : 248
Expected Failures  : 1
Unsupported Tests  : 83
Unexpected Failures: 44

It's worth to enable the upstreamed features on the GCC/NetBSD frontend
as well. We are doing it currently downstream in the NetBSD distribution.

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature