This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [PATCH] Fix -fsanitize=address VLA instrumentation (PR sanitizer/85230)
- From: Jakub Jelinek <jakub at redhat dot com>
- To: Jeff Law <law at redhat dot com>, Dodji Seketeli <dodji at redhat dot com>, Maxim Ostapenko <m dot ostapenko at samsung dot com>
- Cc: gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: Fri, 13 Apr 2018 18:42:32 +0200
- Subject: Re: [PATCH] Fix -fsanitize=address VLA instrumentation (PR sanitizer/85230)
- References: <20180412221606.GU8577@tucnak>
- Reply-to: Jakub Jelinek <jakub at redhat dot com>
On Fri, Apr 13, 2018 at 12:16:06AM +0200, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> Bootstrapped on
> {x86_64,i686,powerpc64,powerpc64le,aarch64,s390x,armv7hl}-linux, regtested
> on {x86_64,i686,powerpc64,powerpc64le}-linux so far, but on the power* ones
> on virtual address space size that isn't really supported (likely
> https://github.com/google/sanitizers/issues/933#issuecomment-380058705
> issue, so while nothing regresses there, pretty much all asan tests fail
> there before and after the patch); also tested successfully with
> asan.exp=alloca* on gcc110 and gcc112 on compile farm where it doesn't
> suffer from the VA issue. Ok if testing passes also on aarch64, s390x
> and armv7hl?
Passed regtest also on aarch64, s390x and armv7hl, additionally with the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85394#c2 patch on top of this
patch bootstrapped/regtested on powerpc64{,le}-linux, this time without
any asan related issues.
Ok for trunk?
Jakub