On Wed, Nov 27, 2013 at 01:11:59PM -0700, Jeff Law wrote:
> On 11/27/13 00:36, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> >
> >Use libbacktrace for libsanitizer's symbolization (will need tweaking,
> >depending on next libsanitizer merge, whether the corresponding
> >sanitizer_common changes are upstreamed or not, and perhaps to compile
> >libbacktrace sources again with renamed function names and other tweaks
> >- different allocator, only subset of files, etc.; but, there is a P1
> >bug for this anyway):
> >http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2013-11/msg02055.html
> Isn't libsanitizer maintained outside GCC? In which case making
> significant changes of this nature ought to be avoided.
libsanitizer contains some files imported from upstream (pretty much all of
*.cc and *.h) and the rest (configury/Makefiles etc.) is owned by GCC, as
the LLVM buildsystem is very different.
> While I see the benefit in what you're doing, I question if we want
> to go down this road.
>
> Or is it the case that the build stuff in libsanitizer is ours and
> the only shared bits you'r hacking up are
> sanitizer_symbolizer_posix_libcdep.cc?
The changes to the *.cc/*.h files actally have been committed to upstream,
so a next merge from upstream will bring those changes automatically and
we'll just need the build system etc. changes. When that happens (I think
Kostya said he'll work on that), I'll update the patch accordingly.
Jakub
