This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: libsanitizer merge from upstream r196090
- From: "H.J. Lu" <hjl dot tools at gmail dot com>
- To: Jakub Jelinek <jakub at redhat dot com>
- Cc: Ian Lance Taylor <iant at google dot com>, FX <fxcoudert at gmail dot com>, gcc-patches <gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org>, Konstantin Serebryany <konstantin dot s dot serebryany at gmail dot com>
- Date: Wed, 4 Dec 2013 09:01:23 -0800
- Subject: Re: libsanitizer merge from upstream r196090
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <72EBEFD0-CB56-4DCE-916A-EFBE449C3B62 at gmail dot com> <CAKOQZ8ywsNxj41Z3XXaxjmq=SSJ2zh6R-tNjdLvdPQCMMsGU_g at mail dot gmail dot com> <CAMe9rOr6Q+-J2X+iSN6o31HLr=Lmfw5zcowYhQh6RHQToMG4WA at mail dot gmail dot com> <20131204165843 dot GV892 at tucnak dot redhat dot com>
On Wed, Dec 4, 2013 at 8:58 AM, Jakub Jelinek <jakub@redhat.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 04, 2013 at 08:47:41AM -0800, H.J. Lu wrote:
>> > I believe this is a case where the GCC project gets more benefit from
>> > libsanitizer than libsanitizer gets from being part of the GCC
>> > project. We should work with the libsanitizer developers to make this
>> > work, not just push everything back on them.
>> >
>>
>> I think libsanitizer should be disabled automatically if kernel or glibc are
>> too old.
>
> For very old I agree, I just strongly disagree with saying that anything
> older than a year and half is too old.
> So, as very old and unsupportable I'd probably consider e.g. Linux kernels
> without futex support, libsanitizer apparently uses those in various places
> and doesn't have a fallback. The question is how to do that though, because
> libraries are now disabled through lib*/configure.tgt UNSUPPORTED=1, and
> that is sourced in by toplevel configure, so any configure checks would need
> to be in toplevel configure. Or of course, we could in those cases
> configure the libsanitizer directory, but just decide not to build anything
> in there.
>
The kernel and glibc check should be done at the toplevel.
So what are the minimum kernel and glibc we want to
support?
--
H.J.