http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56128
--- Comment #11 from Kostya Serebryany <kcc at gcc dot gnu.org> 2013-02-11 12:58:07 UTC --- > We need more than that. E.g. ppc64 asan is very much broken in the gcc tree, > that is fixed in upstream libasan already, right? Last time I tried, basic tests passed on ppc64 with 44 address space (did not checke with 46 AS). > > I'd think we should just do one more llvm -> libsanitizer merge soon (after > the > scanf stuff is resolved?). Ok, I'll do the merge after the scanf stuff is in. > A slight complication is that asan_test.cc got > split into smaller tests, but even for GCC it will be worthwhile to have fewer > smaller tests I guess, we'll just need to add the wrappers. > > BTW, any progress with the 0x7fff8000 shadow offset for x86_64? Not yet. Hopefully will try it this week. > If it looks > good benchmark-wise, I think it would be better if we switched the ASAN x86_64 > ABI for GCC sooner (read, before 4.8) than have one asan ABI for 4.8 built > objects and another one for 4.9 built objects (which is still possible that it > will happen, but it wouldn't hurt to avoid that). Agree. How much time do we have?
