This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: Backporting KAsan patches to 4.9 branch
- From: Jakub Jelinek <jakub at redhat dot com>
- To: Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov at google dot com>
- Cc: Yury Gribov <y dot gribov at samsung dot com>, gcc <gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org>, Konstantin Serebryany <konstantin dot s dot serebryany at gmail dot com>, Konstantin Khlebnikov <k dot khlebnikov at samsung dot com>, Andrey Ryabinin <a dot ryabinin at samsung dot com>, Viacheslav Garbuzov <v dot garbuzov at samsung dot com>
- Date: Tue, 14 Oct 2014 13:22:24 +0200
- Subject: Re: Backporting KAsan patches to 4.9 branch
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <541AA9ED dot 6040705 at samsung dot com> <20140918095754 dot GC17454 at tucnak dot redhat dot com> <543D03FE dot 1020204 at samsung dot com> <CACT4Y+YH7rg3mtrf+qq+ZV8W+kpG6PaTu5OkShfmdPHihcocXg at mail dot gmail dot com>
- Reply-to: Jakub Jelinek <jakub at redhat dot com>
On Tue, Oct 14, 2014 at 03:19:10PM +0400, Dmitry Vyukov wrote:
> > One problem is that for BUILT_IN_ASAN_REPORT_{LOAD,STORE}_N patch I need
> > libsanitizer APIs (__asan_loadN, __asan_storeN) which were introduced in a
> > giant libsanitizer merge in 5.0. In current patchset I backport the whole
> > merge patch (and a bunch of cherry-picks which followed it) but it changes
> > libsanitizer ABI (new version of __asan_init_vXXX, etc.) which is probably
> > undesirable. Another option would be to backport just the necessary minimum
> > (__asan_loadN, __asan_storeN). How should I proceed?
>
> Backporting only __asan_loadN/__asan_storeN looks like the safest option to me.
That's still an ABI change, libasan is not symbol versioned (perhaps we
should change that).
Jakub