This is the mail archive of the gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: [PATCH 0/3] Libsanitizer: merge from trunk


On 8/13/19 5:02 PM, Jeff Law wrote:
> On 8/13/19 7:07 AM, Martin Liska wrote:
>> Hi.
>>
>> For this year, I decided to make a first merge now and the
>> next (much smaller) at the end of October.
>>
>> The biggest change is rename of many files from .cc to .cpp.
>>
>> I bootstrapped the patch set on x86_64-linux-gnu and run
>> asan/ubsan/tsan tests on x86_64, ppc64le (power8) and
>> aarch64.
>>
>> Libasan SONAME has been already bumped compared to GCC 9.
>>
>> For other libraries, I don't see a reason for library bumping:
>>
>> $ abidiff /usr/lib64/libubsan.so.1.0.0 ./x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/libsanitizer/ubsan/.libs/libubsan.so.1.0.0 --stat
>> Functions changes summary: 0 Removed, 0 Changed, 4 Added functions
>> Variables changes summary: 0 Removed, 0 Changed, 0 Added variable
>> Function symbols changes summary: 3 Removed, 0 Added function symbols not referenced by debug info
>> Variable symbols changes summary: 0 Removed, 0 Added variable symbol not referenced by debug info
>>
>> $ abidiff /usr/lib64/libtsan.so.0.0.0  ./x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/libsanitizer/tsan/.libs/libtsan.so.0.0.0 --stat
>> Functions changes summary: 0 Removed, 0 Changed, 47 Added functions
>> Variables changes summary: 0 Removed, 0 Changed, 0 Added variable
>> Function symbols changes summary: 1 Removed, 2 Added function symbols not referenced by debug info
>> Variable symbols changes summary: 0 Removed, 0 Added variable symbol not referenced by debug info
>>
>> Ready to be installed?
> ISTM that a sanitizer merge during stage1 should be able to move forward
> without ACKs.  Similarly for other runtimes where we pull from some
> upstream master.

Good then. I've just installed the patch and also the refresh of LOCAL_PATCHES.

> 
> I'd be slightly concerned about the function removals, but I don't think
> we've really tried to be ABI stable for the sanitizer runtimes.

These are fine based on the function names.

Martin

> 
> jeff
> 

>From 090353a2c70b2cf18add7520e34366e10b7f54f7 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Martin Liska <mliska@suse.cz>
Date: Wed, 14 Aug 2019 10:48:38 +0200
Subject: [PATCH] Refresh LOCAL_PATCHES

libsanitizer/ChangeLog:

2019-08-14  Martin Liska  <mliska@suse.cz>

	* LOCAL_PATCHES: Refresh based on what was committed.
---
 libsanitizer/LOCAL_PATCHES | 7 +------
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 6 deletions(-)

diff --git a/libsanitizer/LOCAL_PATCHES b/libsanitizer/LOCAL_PATCHES
index f653712fdda..121df67826b 100644
--- a/libsanitizer/LOCAL_PATCHES
+++ b/libsanitizer/LOCAL_PATCHES
@@ -1,6 +1 @@
-r258525
-r265667
-r265668
-r265669
-r265950
-r270208
+r274427
-- 
2.22.0


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]