Hi Max,
Thanks in advance. My firmware users use gcc much more than clang, so I
appreciate if you could give priority to the gcc dynamic shadow feature.
Thanks
Steven
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"address-sanitizer" group.
To unsubscribe from th
Hi,
четверг, 1 июня 2017 г., 14:27:16 UTC+3 пользователь Yuri Gribov написал:
>
> On Thu, Jun 1, 2017 at 11:51 AM, steven shi > wrote:
> > Clang does works, at least for X64, and I have depended on it to enable
> the
> > LLVM Asan in my Uefi firmware. I can see the related patch is here:
> >
On Thu, Jun 1, 2017 at 11:51 AM, steven shi wrote:
> Clang does works, at least for X64, and I have depended on it to enable the
> LLVM Asan in my Uefi firmware. I can see the related patch is here:
> https://reviews.llvm.org/D23354. Although this patch say it is for Windows
> 64bits, but I think
Clang does works, at least for X64, and I have depended on it to enable the
LLVM Asan in my Uefi firmware. I can see the related patch is here:
https://reviews.llvm.org/D23354. Although this patch say it is for Windows
64bits, but I think this patch is architecture independent, isn't it?
The d
On Thu, Jun 1, 2017 at 9:40 AM, steven shi wrote:
> Hello,
> I'm trying to enable the gcc asan on my bare-mental firmware after llvm. I
> need to set the GCC Asan shadow memory value dynamically, but I cannot find
> proper gcc build option to do it. With Clang, I can use "-mllvm
> -asan-force-dyna
Hello,
I'm trying to enable the gcc asan on my bare-mental firmware after llvm. I
need to set the GCC Asan shadow memory value dynamically, but I cannot find
proper gcc build option to do it. With Clang, I can use "-mllvm
-asan-force-dynamic-shadow=true" build option and assign the dynamic shado
