[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: address/leak sanitizer, somebody?
From: |
Thomas Schwinge |
Subject: |
Re: address/leak sanitizer, somebody? |
Date: |
Tue, 14 Apr 2015 17:59:40 +0200 |
User-agent: |
Notmuch/0.9-101-g81dad07 (http://notmuchmail.org) Emacs/24.4.1 (i586-pc-linux-gnu) |
Hi!
On Tue, 14 Apr 2015 17:03:46 +0200, Samuel Thibault <samuel.thibault@gnu.org>
wrote:
> Samuel Thibault, le Tue 14 Apr 2015 15:08:51 +0200, a écrit :
> > For work I've been having a look at -fsanitize in gcc. It's not as
> > powerful as valgrind, but it should provide very good feedback, and
> > apart from tsan, it seems to be very easy to port to other systems
> > (basically tell the ucontext layout, the rest is mostly glibc-generic
> > actually), could somebody have a look?
>
> Apparently asan (address sanitizer) is 64bit only, but lsan (memory
> leak) seems to be 32bit too.
When I had a (really quick) look, years ago,
<http://darnassus.sceen.net/~hurd-web/open_issues/_san/>, I
found/declared that »[p]orting these to the Hurd is not a trivial task,
for they have intimate knowledge about the operating system kernel
they're running on, and from a first look they reimplement a lot of glibc
by directly using system calls -- which is basically a no-go on GNU
Hurd«. Well, maybe not a "no-go", but if my "analysis" is still correct,
we'd need to add a lot of wrapper code, to call back into the "real" libc
(instead of doing system calls).
That said, I'd be very happy about such a port, of course. Preferably
this should be done directly upstream, that is, in the LLVM repository.
(Which will then be merged in GCC.)
Grüße,
Thomas
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature