This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [PATCHv4] Enable -fsanitize-recover for KASan
- From: Jakub Jelinek <jakub at redhat dot com>
- To: Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov at google dot com>
- Cc: Yury Gribov <y dot gribov at samsung dot com>, Andrey Ryabinin <a dot ryabinin at samsung dot com>, GCC Patches <gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org>, Konstantin Serebryany <konstantin dot s dot serebryany at gmail dot com>, Konstantin Khlebnikov <k dot khlebnikov at samsung dot com>
- Date: Fri, 24 Oct 2014 11:50:58 +0200
- Subject: Re: [PATCHv4] Enable -fsanitize-recover for KASan
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <5448AE0D dot 2080207 at samsung dot com> <5448CF90 dot 2040001 at samsung dot com> <20141023095532 dot GD10376 at tucnak dot redhat dot com> <5448D3EB dot 9030402 at samsung dot com> <20141023101649 dot GF10376 at tucnak dot redhat dot com> <5448D986 dot 5020300 at samsung dot com> <20141023103802 dot GG10376 at tucnak dot redhat dot com> <5448E223 dot 3020804 at samsung dot com> <544A0D92 dot 5040002 at samsung dot com> <CACT4Y+bPQzgMKTMVuFHU3YXxMf=c8V0GZM_HPisZ-SYKx6TkLQ at mail dot gmail dot com>
- Reply-to: Jakub Jelinek <jakub at redhat dot com>
On Fri, Oct 24, 2014 at 01:44:27PM +0400, Dmitry Vyukov wrote:
> I am somewhat lost in this thread and probably missing something.
> But why do we need __asan_load (which is not noabort) at all? Outline
> instrumentation is non a default mode for both user-space asan and
> kasan (at least in the envisioned future). I would expect that these
> non-typical cases that use outline instrumentation can also bear the
> overhead of non-noreturn functions. Can we use just one version of
> __asan_load and let runtime decide on abort?
__asan_load actually must never be noreturn, because in the common
case where the load is valid it of course returns.