On Fri, Feb 12, 2021 at 8:19 PM Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > I've updated buildfarm member longfin to use "-fsanitize=alignment > -fsanitize-trap=alignment", and it just got through a run successfully > with that. It'd be good perhaps if some other buildfarm owners > followed suit (mumble JIT coverage mumble). > > Looking around at other recent reports, it looks like we'll need to tweak > the compiler version cutoffs a bit. I see for instance that spurfowl, > with gcc (Ubuntu 5.4.0-6ubuntu1~16.04.11) 5.4.0 20160609, is whining: > > pg_crc32c_sse42.c:24:1: warning: \342\200\230no_sanitize\342\200\231 > attribute directive ignored [-Wattributes] > > So maybe it'd better be __GNUC__ >= 6 not __GNUC__ >= 5. I think > we can wait a little bit for more reports before messing with that, > though.
I've rechecked this in the documentation. no_sanitize attribute seems to appear since gcc 8.0. Much later than alignment sanitizer itself. https://gcc.gnu.org/gcc-8/changes.html "A new attribute no_sanitize can be applied to functions to instruct the compiler not to do sanitization of the options provided as arguments to the attribute. Acceptable values for no_sanitize match those acceptable by the -fsanitize command-line option." Yes, let's wait for more feedback from buildfarm and fix the version requirement. > Once this does settle, should we consider back-patching so that it's > possible to run alignment checks in the back branches too? +1 ------ Regards, Alexander Korotkov
