https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68824
--- Comment #10 from Dmitry Vyukov ---
Submitted in:
http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?view=revision=258119
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68824
--- Comment #11 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Tue Jan 19 12:45:54 2016
New Revision: 232555
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=232555=gcc=rev
Log:
PR sanitizer/68824
* tsan/tsan_interceptors.cc (NEED_TLS_GET_ADDR,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68824
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68824
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68824
--- Comment #5 from Dmitry Vyukov ---
In 3) did you mean -mstackrealign?
1) looks like the simplest option. Are there any downsides?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68824
--- Comment #7 from Dmitry Vyukov ---
I will land such fix in clang. Thanks!
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68824
--- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek ---
(In reply to Dmitry Vyukov from comment #5)
> In 3) did you mean -mstackrealign?
No, I meant -mincoming-stack-boundary=3, -mstackrealign doesn't do anything in
this case.
> 1) looks like the simplest
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68824
--- Comment #8 from Dmitry Vyukov ---
Jakub, does the following patch look good to you?
Just don't want to intermix tsan and sanitizer_common interceptor macros.
I think it's better to define and initialize an interceptor in a single file.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68824
--- Comment #9 from Jakub Jelinek ---
LGTM, builds fine as well.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68824
Dmitry Vyukov changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||dvyukov at google dot com
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68824
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ABI
Priority|P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68824
--- Comment #1 from Jakub Jelinek ---
I don't think this is a problem. It would be of course better if the sanitizer
shared libraries were symbol versioned, but in case of libraries that override
versioned libraries it might be interesting to
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68824
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek ---
What I wrote were some approaches how to make symbols that aren't part of the
libtsan.so.* ABI not exported from the library.
If __interceptor_* functions are part of the ABI, as seems to be the case from
13 matches
Mail list logo