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: PR other/55292: libsanitizer doesn't support x32


H.J.,
Question about this patch.
Will it work if we simply replace
   #if __WORDSIZE == 64
with
  #ifdef x86_64
?

Today, x86_64 is the only 64-bit architecture supported by asan
run-time on linux anyway.


On Tue, Nov 13, 2012 at 1:53 PM, H.J. Lu <hjl.tools@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 13, 2012 at 1:40 PM, Konstantin Serebryany
> <konstantin.s.serebryany@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Tue, Nov 13, 2012 at 3:42 AM, Jakub Jelinek <jakub@redhat.com> wrote:
>>> On Tue, Nov 13, 2012 at 03:31:21AM -0800, H.J. Lu wrote:
>>>> On Tue, Nov 13, 2012 at 3:20 AM, Dodji Seketeli <dodji@redhat.com> wrote:
>>>> > Diego Novillo <dnovillo@google.com> a écrit:
>>>> >
>>>> >> Patches to libsanitizer should be sent upstream.  We should only
>>>> >> contain a copy of the master in the LLVM repository.  There should be
>>>> >> instructions in libsanitizer/README.gcc (Jakub, Dodji, are they there?
>>>> >>  I can't check ATM).
>>>> >
>>>> > No there are not, for the moment.  README.gcc just says where the
>>>> > sources the 'upstream' project is.
>>>> >
>>>>
>>>> What is the plan to add GCC specific support:
>>>>
>>>> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55291
>>>> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55292
>>>> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55304
>>>>
>>>> and
>>>>
>>>> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2012-11/msg00967.html
>>>
>>> CCing Wei, I don't know the details about the import.  To me it looks like
>>> that most or all of the libsanitizer/ level files (and
>>> libsanitizer/*/Makefile.{am,in}) don't originate from
>>> llvm/projects/compiler-rt/lib , so they should be owned by GCC and thus
>>> should be changed to support multilibs, use the same libtool/autoconf/etc.
>>> versions as rest of gcc etc.
>>
>>
>> Correct. Whatever happens to Makefile, configure and other non-.{cc,h}
>> files is a purely GCC thing.
>>
>>>
>>> For changes to the files actually imported from LLVM I guess it depends on
>>> if google is going to accept such changes in the LLVM upstream.
>>
>> Yes, we are willing to support any changes that make libasan support
>> more targets.
>> We would prefer all patches to go through LLVM first, and then ported
>> to GCC by copying files verbatim
>> This is the only way we can cope with the two versions.
>> (Wei, we will need the exact details for doing this in the README file)
>>
>
> Could someone please check this patch:
>
> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2012-11/msg00951.html
>
> into upstream?
>
> Thanks.
>
>
> --
> H.J.


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