This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: Revert libsanitizer patches or fix 59009
- From: Kostya Serebryany <kcc at google dot com>
- To: Michael Meissner <meissner at linux dot vnet dot ibm dot com>, Evgeniy Stepanov <eugeni dot stepanov at gmail dot com>, Kostya Serebryany <kcc at google dot com>, Jakub Jelinek <jakub at redhat dot com>, Peter Bergner <bergner at vnet dot ibm dot com>, Konstantin Serebryany <konstantin dot s dot serebryany at gmail dot com>, Jack Howarth <howarth at bromo dot med dot uc dot edu>, Alexander Potapenko <glider at google dot com>, GCC Patches <gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org>, Dodji Seketeli <dodji at redhat dot com>, Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov at google dot com>, Bill Schmidt <wschmidt at zalov dot cz>
- Date: Tue, 12 Nov 2013 09:41:14 -0800
- Subject: Re: Revert libsanitizer patches or fix 59009
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <1383611584 dot 5700 dot 45 dot camel at otta> <CAGQ9bdyEu_io7ReR2HBbRdJQeHCtfidGVr85Fx4uZaS0XhCRGA at mail dot gmail dot com> <20131105071912 dot GD27813 at tucnak dot zalov dot cz> <1383667034 dot 5700 dot 54 dot camel at otta> <1383674821 dot 5700 dot 57 dot camel at otta> <CABMLtrhAiLybgf422PvRiWA8oXk-_qFnVa9ZdYnSh6p1gLsz-g at mail dot gmail dot com> <20131105184531 dot GR27813 at tucnak dot zalov dot cz> <CABMLtrjhKwfaCUFvQbB1K3_7VMYXm+vb_wqHX8eaV-=D3BPKgQ at mail dot gmail dot com> <20131106115318 dot GZ27813 at tucnak dot zalov dot cz> <CABMLtriEBy9NcsU=Xi63sjcwz5GYdU8su=j9COq9ywOf3BGt8g at mail dot gmail dot com> <20131112173725 dot GA24313 at ibm-tiger dot the-meissners dot org> <CAN=P9pgrW30Xnv0DsmkQNY72uyzwEQaWUAthaHYwuq3=Giz_Tw at mail dot gmail dot com>
So far I was not able to reproduce the compilation failure -- and I am
asking someone from the PowerPC side to help.
Please apply any minimal #ifdef patch to
sanitizer_platform_limits_linux.cc to make it compile, while keeping
x86_64 tests pass.
If we revert the patch now, I will not be able to work on it again in
nearest months, which means 4.9 will not get updated asan.
How bad that is -- I don't know.
On Tue, Nov 12, 2013 at 9:40 AM, Kostya Serebryany <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> So far I was not able to reproduce the compilation failure -- and I am
> asking someone from the PowerPC side to help.
> Please apply any minimal #ifdef patch to sanitizer_platform_limits_linux.cc
> to make it compile, while keeping x86_64 tests pass.
> If we revert the patch now, I will not be able to work on it again in
> nearest months, which means 4.9 will not get updated asan.
> How bad that is -- I don't know.
> On Tue, Nov 12, 2013 at 9:37 AM, Michael Meissner
> <email@example.com> wrote:
>> It has been a week since the libsanitizer patches were checked in, which
>> the PowerPC64 Linux system along with others (PR 59009 for powerpc).
>> revert these patches while you are working on proper fixes for all of the
>> and targets.
>> Quoting from the GCC development plan:
>> Patch Reversion
>> If a patch is committed which introduces a regression on any target which
>> Steering Committee considers to be important and if:
>> the problem is reported to the original poster; 48 hours pass without the
>> original poster or any other party indicating that a fix will be
>> forthcoming in
>> the very near future; two people with write privileges to the affected
>> area of
>> the compiler determine that the best course of action is to revert the
>> then they may revert the patch.
>> (The list of important targets will be revised at the beginning of each
>> cycle, if necessary, and is part of the release criteria.)
>> After the patch has been reverted, the poster may appeal the decision to
>> Steering Committee.
>> Note that no distinction is made between patches which are themselves
>> buggy and
>> patches that expose latent bugs elsewhere in the compiler.
>> Michael Meissner, IBM
>> IBM, M/S 2506R, 550 King Street, Littleton, MA 01460, USA
>> email: firstname.lastname@example.org, phone: +1 (978) 899-4797