Re: [PATCHv3][PING] Enable -fsanitize-recover for KASan

[Yury Gribov <y dot gribov at samsung dot com>]

On 09/30/2014 09:40 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 29, 2014 at 05:24:02PM -0700, Konstantin Serebryany wrote:
> > > I don't think we ever going to support recovery for regular ASan
> > > (Kostya, correct me if I'm wrong).
> >
> > I hope so too.
> > Another point is that with asan-instrumentation-with-call-threshold=0
> > (instrumentation with callbacks)
>
> The normal (non-recovery) callbacks are __attribute__((noreturn)) for
> performance reasons, and you do need different callbacks and different
> generated code if you want to recover (after the callback you need jump
> back to a basic block after the conditional jump).
> So, in that case you would need -fsanitize-recover=address.
>
> > > I see no problem in enabling -fsanitize-recover by default for
> > > -fsanitize=undefined and
> >
> > This becomes more interesting when we use asan and ubsan together.
>
> That is fairly common case.

I think we can summarize:
* the current option -fsanitize-recover is misleading; it's really 
-fubsan-recover
* we need a way to selectively enable/disable recovery for different 
sanitizers

The most promininet solution seems to be
* allow -fsanitize-recover=tgt1,tgt2 syntax
* -fsanitize-recover wo options would still mean UBSan recovery

The question is what to do with -fno-sanitize-recover then.

-Y