This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [PATCHv3][PING] Enable -fsanitize-recover for KASan
- From: Alexey Samsonov <samsonov at google dot com>
- To: Jakub Jelinek <jakub at redhat dot com>
- Cc: Yury Gribov <y dot gribov at samsung dot com>, Konstantin Serebryany <konstantin dot s dot serebryany at gmail dot com>, GCC Patches <gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org>, Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov at google dot com>, Andrey Ryabinin <a dot ryabinin at samsung dot com>, Konstantin Khlebnikov <k dot khlebnikov at samsung dot com>
- Date: Fri, 3 Oct 2014 11:54:44 -0700
- Subject: Re: [PATCHv3][PING] Enable -fsanitize-recover for KASan
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <20140929231720 dot GI17454 at tucnak dot redhat dot com> <CAGSYnCPAN83v+JOyw-jMLUEE2YjaNQykdTCG4rdd=o_ieC4vFA at mail dot gmail dot com> <CAGQ9bdyWWNMt4m9jO2N1nzvVFjVuT1zbyey362WvnMxJZmNkBw at mail dot gmail dot com> <20140930054027 dot GJ17454 at tucnak dot redhat dot com> <542A56C0 dot 2030506 at samsung dot com> <CAGSYnCNTqXyWTHQERJe1t2uiNmOYGTMcU761Zs8N1DxUpZQnYw at mail dot gmail dot com> <20140930173340 dot GI1986 at tucnak dot redhat dot com> <CAGSYnCMCMUPhttwyPMjSmpiim2U26cD6ef7sc9KdP9tRkZu7uQ at mail dot gmail dot com> <20140930173913 dot GJ1986 at tucnak dot redhat dot com> <CAGSYnCNQ32xANX=+T2UzP0HSUjQg0gYmu4WijHV+hpzFdcaBCg at mail dot gmail dot com> <20141002055819 dot GY1986 at tucnak dot redhat dot com>
On Wed, Oct 1, 2014 at 10:58 PM, Jakub Jelinek <email@example.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 01, 2014 at 04:21:29PM -0700, Alexey Samsonov wrote:
>> Speaking of plain -f(no-)sanitize-recover - it would probably be
>> better to change the semantics of this flag,
>> so that "-f(no-)?sanitize-recover" means "enable(disable) recovery for
>> all sanitizers enabled at this point".
>> That is, it would be pretty much like -Werror flag.
>> For example,
>> "-fsanitize=undefined -fsanitize=address -fno-sanitize-recover"
>> would mean "run UBSan and ASan and don't recover from errors".
> That would change behavior, e.g. for
> -fsanitize=undefined,address -fsanitize-recover
> would suddenly enable recovery from asan errors while previously
> they wouldn't be recovering.
> GCC has not shipped with the -fsanitize-recover flag yet (we have just
> vendor backport of it), so if you don't mind changing behavior for clang
> users, I can live with that.
Yes, I think so. -fsanitize-recover was not documented in Clang user manual.
> Would the default still be
> -fsanitize-recover=undefined,kernel-address -fno-sanitize-recover=address ?
Alexey Samsonov, Mountain View, CA