On Thu, Aug 14, 2014 at 7:29 AM, Todd Fiala <tfi...@google.com> wrote:
> Hey all, > > Regarding this bug: > http://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=20658 > > We've been discussing the idea of having ASLR disabled by default when > launching processes within lldb. Currently it looks like the default > behavior is to have it enabled, and require explicitly disabling to get > that behavior for the process. > > It seems like it might make more sense to have it disabled by default - > that way code references would likely be static across debugger runs, which > seems to be more what we want when tracking down issues across code runs. > > Any thoughts on this? > My strong preference: disable ASLR by default. 1) It matches the behavior of most debuggers today. 2) There are not many options when a bug vanishes under the debugger: ASLR, threading interactions, or ptrace behavior changes (or equivalent on any other platform). I don't think this is hard for someone to realize. Also, please fix the spelling of the flag here. '--disable-aslr=False' would be... a really terrible interface. ;] > > The counterargument I could make for changing it would be (aside from > legacy compatibility issues perhaps on the MacOSX/iOS side) - taking the > exe out of its native state on the OS. If a bug is ASLR sensitive, the > user might miss it. And so behavior in the debugger could differ from the > exe in its native state. Not sure how relevant that is for the majority of > usages, though. > I think this is both rare and easy to diagnose as indicated above. > > I'll be fixing the fact that Linux is ignoring this altogether. But while > I'm in there, I could flip the default if we wanted to do it. If not > globally, we'd probably pursue defaulting it on Linux (and Ed seems to like > it for FreeBSD as well, so maybe for not Apple in that case?) > Thanks!
_______________________________________________ lldb-dev mailing list lldb-dev@cs.uiuc.edu http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/lldb-dev
