At r243019 I see hundreds of asan failures on x86_64-apple-darwin10 of the kind FAIL: c-c++-common/asan/bitfield-1.c -O0 output pattern test, is dyld: Symbol not found: _memmem x86_64-apple-darwin16 is OK.
Created attachment 40240 [details] Patch from Iain Sandoe Results with the patch at https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2016-12/msg00469.html.
This probably needs to go to upstream compiler-rt first. Also, it would be cleaner not to define SI_MEMMEM to 1 on Windows and move the comment there.
Have you raised this with compiler-rt upstream already?
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #3) > Have you raised this with compiler-rt upstream already? I don't believe that upstream supports the sanitisers for Darwin < 11. However, as seen, they are quite capable of function with a little TLC. I don't have a chance to progress this until at least mid-Feb, if it's more urgent, then (a) please adopt some version of the patch locally, or (b) disable for Darwin < 11.
(In reply to Iain Sandoe from comment #4) > (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #3) > > Have you raised this with compiler-rt upstream already? > > I don't believe that upstream supports the sanitisers for Darwin < 11. > > However, as seen, they are quite capable of function with a little TLC. I > don't have a chance to progress this until at least mid-Feb, if it's more > urgent, then (a) please adopt some version of the patch locally, or (b) > disable for Darwin < 11. They don't, but they can actually accept the patch for Darwin 10 (I used to commit such patches after previous merge). I can post attached fix upstream, but than I'll ask you (or Dominique) for help in testing if they won't accept the patch as it is (most likely they won't).
(In reply to Maxim Ostapenko from comment #5) > (In reply to Iain Sandoe from comment #4) > > (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #3) > > > Have you raised this with compiler-rt upstream already? > > > > I don't believe that upstream supports the sanitisers for Darwin < 11. > > > > However, as seen, they are quite capable of function with a little TLC. I > > don't have a chance to progress this until at least mid-Feb, if it's more > > urgent, then (a) please adopt some version of the patch locally, or (b) > > disable for Darwin < 11. > > They don't, but they can actually accept the patch for Darwin 10 (I used to > commit such patches after previous merge). > I can post attached fix upstream, but than I'll ask you (or Dominique) for > help in testing if they won't accept the patch as it is (most likely they > won't). I've initiated discussion upstream: https://reviews.llvm.org/D29287
Created attachment 40646 [details] Fix 2 Iain, could you test the following patch? This one is likely to be applied upstream. As a side note, LLVM folks are not very happy with these patches (they lack of buildbots to test them). Thus I suspect that for future releases we'll need a) apply Darwin 10 patches locally or b) disable ASan for Darwin 10.
> Created attachment 40646 [details] > --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=40646&action=edit > Fix 2 I have tested the patch on darwin10 and 16. On darwin10 the failures are fixed as with the Iain's patch, no regression on darwin16. Thanks.
Author: chefmax Date: Fri Feb 3 12:17:59 2017 New Revision: 245149 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=245149&root=gcc&view=rev Log: PR sanitizer/78663 * sanitizer_common/sanitizer_mac.cc: Cherry-pick upstream r293992. * sanitizer_common/sanitizer_platform_interceptors.h: Likewise. Modified: trunk/libsanitizer/ChangeLog trunk/libsanitizer/sanitizer_common/sanitizer_mac.cc trunk/libsanitizer/sanitizer_common/sanitizer_platform_interceptors.h
So fixed?
> So fixed? AFAICT from my tests on darwin10 and 16 yes! Closing.