- User Since
- Oct 3 2012, 3:00 AM (297 w, 5 d)
Fri, Jun 15
Did you try BFD with more than one function? There was a fun bug where the "first" (for some definition of the word) input section of an output section was treated differently from the rest.
Fri, Jun 8
Sounds like a good idea.
Wed, Jun 6
Yes, and we put all globals in comdats, too. See AddressSanitizerModule::InstrumentGlobalsELF.
Tue, Jun 5
Thu, May 31
Fri, May 25
i.e. unless you've tested it on one of those systems, it might be safer to disable the test instead
Just keep in mind that this test tries to exhaust the address space, but, without NORESERVE semantics, it would exhaust physical RAM instead and may DOS the entire system.
- How does MSan work at all if MAP_NORESERVE is not implemented? Is it actually the default setting, and it's the opposite behavior that is not implemented?
- If the flag is defined in the headers but ignored by the kernel, then what is the purpose of this patch?
Tue, May 22
Mon, May 21
May 18 2018
May 15 2018
May 14 2018
May 11 2018
May 9 2018
May 8 2018
May 7 2018
What if there is no short read and the entire list is read in one syscall - does that mean that we've got a consistent thread list for some point of time in the past? If so, then iterating until the list stops changing and ignoring any attempts that ended in short reads should work.
May 4 2018
Looks great, thank you!
Apr 23 2018
Apr 20 2018
Apr 19 2018
That's a lot of code :(
But I don't see anything that could be thrown or factored out. We don't really need fixed (zero-based) stuff, but it's good to have it around for a while (for benchmarks and such).
Apr 18 2018
Apr 17 2018
Add a test, please.
Apr 13 2018
LGTM (+missing *-commits MLs)
Apr 12 2018
LGTM (did not check the tests).
Could be too many parallel links, try -DLLVM_PARALLEL_LINK_JOBS=3.
Apr 11 2018
LGTM, please add a comment though
Out of curiosity, how does access that far below SP happen in that test? Redzone? But that's not a leaf function.
Apr 10 2018
Simply ninja check-all. Maybe the patch got applied incorrectly. Phabricator is really bad with file copies.
Apr 9 2018
the tests fail with:
clang: /code/llvm-project/llvm/lib/Transforms/Instrumentation/AddressSanitizer.cpp:1064: llvm::FunctionPass *llvm::createAddressSanitizerFunctionPass(bool, bool, bool): Assertion `!CompileKernel || Recover' failed.
Apr 6 2018
Let's keep adding kernel- sanitizers for now.
Apr 4 2018
Merged. Please don't forget to update tests next time.
I take that back, it's natural to expect there to be a no_sanitize("") attribute matching each possible -fsanitize= value.
Apr 3 2018
You are right, it's not the best idea.
Is it too late to get rid of C/C++-level "kernel-address" attribute entirely? For the source code perspective, it's just ASan, but for the kernel. If that's an important distinction, one can always do #ifdef KERNEL or something.
Mar 29 2018
Oh, right. And I removed the extra -msan flags before running the tests. It means you were testing msan^3 before :)
LGTM then. This naming is confusing.
This approach can not handle arrays - it would unpoison only the first element. It could be confusing for the user, but not really worse than the current state. Please mention this in the comment and/or the flag description.
This looks wrong. cfi_slowpath is defined in libclang_rt.cfi, which is linked to the main executable. It is not always dso-local. On Android it is defined in libdl.so and is never dso-local.
Mar 28 2018
Actually, no. The test does not pass, not even close.
; CHECK-BASE-NOT: ret
is tripped by this line:
call void @__msan_warning_noreturn()
Sure. There is still a few extra -msan flags in the tests, I can remove them before commit.
Mar 27 2018
I meant an integer flag with -1 as default value (for no match-all tag).
I too find these checks arbitrary and pointless. @kcc ?
Mar 26 2018
Yes, this sounds fine.
You may want to provide a read-only page for reads and a write-only page for write to validate the use of this interface.
Mar 23 2018
Please address Vitaly's comment.
Please add a separate flag, something like -hwasan-match-all-tag= (0 .. 0xFF, -1).
Mar 22 2018
OK, sure, If you feel so strongly about this.