This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: Revert libsanitizer patches or fix 59009
- From: Kostya Serebryany <kcc at google dot com>
- To: John David Anglin <dave dot anglin at bell dot net>
- Cc: Konstantin Serebryany <konstantin dot s dot serebryany at gmail dot com>, Jakub Jelinek <jakub at redhat dot com>, Peter Bergner <bergner at vnet dot ibm dot com>, Michael Meissner <meissner at linux dot vnet dot ibm dot com>, Evgeniy Stepanov <eugeni dot stepanov 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>
- Date: Mon, 18 Nov 2013 12:25:03 +0400
- Subject: Re: Revert libsanitizer patches or fix 59009
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <CAN=P9pjkzWkV_rQmcde-DKS8dg8xUjt+pyCUe_8yGMeCrBeRqQ at mail dot gmail dot com> <20131112180403 dot GA30956 at ibm-tiger dot the-meissners dot org> <CAN=P9pgPY-QcGMbm6k25fGS24qcTLXbZX8px+09n-oeG6O5ZzQ at mail dot gmail dot com> <20131112185704 dot GY27813 at tucnak dot zalov dot cz> <CAN=P9pibOvxQyDZzQimGafSZEfemWXXdN=afWJWk17a30Vt-ig at mail dot gmail dot com> <20131112193015 dot GZ27813 at tucnak dot zalov dot cz> <20131112234704 dot GF27813 at tucnak dot zalov dot cz> <20131112234926 dot GG27813 at tucnak dot zalov dot cz> <1384363506 dot 5562 dot 7 dot camel at otta> <1384525007 dot 5562 dot 23 dot camel at otta> <20131115145130 dot GJ892 at tucnak dot redhat dot com> <BLU0-SMTP96372C1D9334D394A5F92097FB0 at phx dot gbl> <CAGQ9bdwYJ0iv54YAvGNCgUbczj7bp4cH55KnqCw6p92VV1QN2A at mail dot gmail dot com> <BLU0-SMTP516C76BC8D4FBF887717AC97FA0 at phx dot gbl>
On Sat, Nov 16, 2013 at 7:59 AM, John David Anglin <dave.anglin@bell.net> wrote:
> As far as I can tell, libsanitizer works on hppa-linux. So, the change
> could be added to the llvm tree.
> However, I'm unlikely to test anything in the tree unless someone tells me
> there's something to test.
Submitted the hppa patch as
http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?view=revision&revision=194995.
>
> Dave
>
>
> On 15-Nov-13, at 10:52 PM, Konstantin Serebryany wrote:
>
>> Dave,
>>
>> Do you want the asan/asan_linux.cc (# elif defined(__hppa__)) part to
>> be in the llvm tree?
>>
>> --kcc
>>
>> On Sat, Nov 16, 2013 at 3:55 AM, John David Anglin <dave.anglin@bell.net>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> On 15-Nov-13, at 9:51 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Fri, Nov 15, 2013 at 08:16:47AM -0600, Peter Bergner wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Wed, 2013-11-13 at 11:25 -0600, Peter Bergner wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Wed, 2013-11-13 at 00:49 +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 2013-11-12 Jakub Jelinek <jakub@redhat.com>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> * sanitizer_common/sanitizer_platform_limits_linux.cc:
>>>>>>> Temporarily
>>>>>>> ifdef out almost the whole source.
>>>>>>> * sanitizer_common/sanitizer_common_syscalls.inc: Likewise.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> That helps, but as Pat reported in the bugzilla, it still is failing.
>>>>>> With the following patch, we can now bootstrap on powerpc64-linux.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Is this ok for trunk?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Does this help the other architectures that are failing for the same
>>>>>> build error?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Ok, Dave reported in PR59009 that my last patch still left a few build
>>>>> problems on HPPA. Dave tested the patch below and confirmed this
>>>>> cleans
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> How can there be problems on HPPA? libsanitizer/configure.tgt says that
>>>> hppa* is UNSUPPORTED, so libsanitizer should never be built there.
>>>> Furthermore, it would be nice to understand why the sigaction is
>>>> different.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Actually, it turns out I have had a patch in my tree enabling it.
>>>
>>> Dave
>>> --
>>> John David Anglin dave.anglin@bell.net
>>>
>>>
>>
>
> --
> John David Anglin dave.anglin@bell.net
>
>
>