Re: Getting ready to merge AddressSanitizer into trunk

[Jeff Law <law at redhat dot com>]

On 10/29/2012 12:07 PM, Dodji Seketeli wrote:
> * [Testing]
>
> It seems like we still lack a (good) test harness for asan.  Most (if
> not all) of the patches we sent were tested by inspecting the gimple
> and assembly output on testing some random input files.
>
> So has anyone run this asan implementation on stronger inputs like
> spec & co?
>
> In any case, after 4.8 (or even after stage1) I guess we'll seriously
> need to have a DejaGNU compatible test harness for asan.
Yea, a dejagnu compatible testing framework would definitively be a good 
thing.  It's going to be much harder for folks not familiar with asan 
keep their patches from breaking asan without a testsuite.


> * [Runtime library]
>
> What are the remaining blocking issues holding us back from having the
> runtime library be copied verbatim from its LLVM home to the GCC tree,
> and been synced regularly starting from there?
I think this is (has?) working its way through the steering committee; 
there were some minor changes we've asked to be made upstream, but I 
don't see anything significant standing in the way right now.

> Assuming all these topics gets consensus, I guess someone needs to
> submit a set of logical patches representing the changes that happened
> on the branch, for the official review of the branch prior to the
> stage1 closing date.  I can help with doing that if no-ones steps up,
> but then I'll need help from the various committers on the branch to
> address the comments that will arise during the review.
>
> What do you think?
Seems reasonable.  I can't think of a reason why that process couldn't 
start now.

jeff