This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: MIPS ASAN status? (and "volunteering")
- From: Hans-Peter Nilsson <hans-peter dot nilsson at axis dot com>
- To: xiaoyur347 at gmail dot com
- Cc: gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: Sat, 3 Mar 2018 14:14:06 +0100
- Subject: Re: MIPS ASAN status? (and "volunteering")
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
> From: Jean Lee <xiaoyur347@gmail.com>
> Date: Fri, 2 Mar 2018 13:29:39 +0800
> 2018-03-02 7:53 GMT+08:00 Hans-Peter Nilsson <hans-peter.nilsson@axis.com>:
>
> > There's no address-sanitizer support for MIPS (in particular for
> > O32) on trunk, at least not when building for
> > mipsisa32r2el-linux-gnu and libsanitizer/configure.tgt seems
> > to support that observation. There's a set of patches "floating
> > around", but the last sign of work-in-progress was more than
> > four years ago, according to a well-known search engine.
> >
> > Is there something holding it up getting it into trunk gcc?
> > Is it just that someone needs to go the last mile?
> >
> > I can do that. I can even go two miles! Maybe even a merge
> > from compiler-rt and MIPS port hacking (to be merged post
> > gcc-8-branch to trunk, I presume).
> >
> > I'm a little worried that the "patches floating around" have
> > unclear copyright status, so I haven't looked at them yet. I'd
> > rather not re-do MIPS ASAN on the gcc-side from scratch, but if
> > it comes to that, so be it.
> >
> > brgds, H-P
> >
>
> It is great to go the last mile. I had done the port to
> mipsel-linux-uclibc gcc for GCC 4.9/5.0/6.0.
> Maybe I can give some help for you.
That would be great, thanks in advance!
First a few troublesome questions:
Are you the sole copyright owner of the patches to gcc that you
know of? (Not including compiler-rt patches, those are for the
compiler-rt people to worry about; I don't know their process.)
If so, have you copyright assignment paper work in progress
done or in progress with the FSF for gcc? (From what I can
tell, if so, it's not completed.) If not, it'd be great if you
can get that started, it takes quite a while.
I believe that's necessary for gcc-specific parts, but I don't
really decide that. But, if those patches are small enough to
not requiring paperwork they're probably also uninteresting
enough that I add them as I go by.
> Let's do the last mile.
> To do this, I have some questions.
> Should we port to the upstream LLVM first and port them back to GCC?
I have no interest in LLVM at present, and can't wait, so:
no, not on my behalf.
But the question makes me wonder: are you implying that ASAN
support for MIPS (O32 little-endian) isn't in upstream
Clang/LLVM *too* or do I misunderstand you? I'm not sure how to
tell myself (save for building it from scratch and trying it,
which I haven't done).
*searches the web again...*
It's not mentioned on
<http://clang.llvm.org/docs/AddressSanitizer.html>, but that
page seems out-of-date (known working platforms not mentioned).
It's mentioned on
<https://github.com/google/sanitizers/wiki/AddressSanitizer> so
maybe I concluded that since MIPS O32 support is not yet in GCC,
it must have been developed using LLVM. I thought I saw reviews
for 3+ year accepted patches, but looking closer that must have
been mips64 support.
Thanks again for your support!
brgds, H-P