Re: [Patch 0/X] HWASAN v3

[asan/hwasan co-author here, with clearly biased opinions] On Android, HWASAN is already a fully usable testing tool. We apply it to the kernel, user space system libraries, and select apps. A phone with HWASAN-ified system is fully usable (I carry one as my primary device since March 2019).

Re: [Patch 0/X] [WIP][RFC][libsanitizer] Introduce HWASAN to GCC

+Peter Collingbourne +Evgeniy Stepanov (the main developers of HWASAN in LLVM, FYI) Please note that Peter has recently implemented support for globals in LLVM's HWASAN. --kcc On Mon, Sep 9, 2019 at 8:55 AM Matthew Malcomson wrote: > > On 09/09/19 11:47, Martin Liška wrote: > > On 9/6/19 4:46

Re: [PATCH] Call REAL(swapcontext) with indirect_return attribute on x86

On Wed, Jul 18, 2018 at 12:29 PM H.J. Lu wrote: > > On Wed, Jul 18, 2018 at 11:45 AM, Kostya Serebryany wrote: > > On Wed, Jul 18, 2018 at 11:40 AM H.J. Lu wrote: > >> > >> On Wed, Jul 18, 2018 at 11:18 AM, Kostya Serebryany > >> wrote: > >&

Re: [PATCH] Call REAL(swapcontext) with indirect_return attribute on x86

On Wed, Jul 18, 2018 at 11:40 AM H.J. Lu wrote: > > On Wed, Jul 18, 2018 at 11:18 AM, Kostya Serebryany wrote: > > What's ENDBR and do we really need to have it in compiler-rt? > > When shadow stack from Intel CET is enabled, the first instruction of all > indirec

Re: [PATCH] Call REAL(swapcontext) with indirect_return attribute on x86

What's ENDBR and do we really need to have it in compiler-rt? As usual, I am opposed to any gcc compiler-rt that bypass upstream. --kcc On Wed, Jul 18, 2018 at 8:37 AM H.J. Lu wrote: > > asan/asan_interceptors.cc has > > ... > int res = REAL(swapcontext)(oucp, ucp); > ... > >

Re: Add support to trace comparison instructions and switch statements

On Tue, Sep 12, 2017 at 7:32 AM, Dmitry Vyukov wrote: > On Thu, Sep 7, 2017 at 9:02 AM, 吴潍浠(此彼) wrote: >> Hi >> The trace-div and trace-gep options seems be used to evaluate corpus >> to trigger specific kind of bugs. And they don't have strong effect to

Re: Add support to trace comparison instructions and switch statements

On Fri, Jul 14, 2017 at 5:23 AM, Dmitry Vyukov <dvyu...@google.com> wrote: > On Thu, Jul 13, 2017 at 11:18 PM, Kostya Serebryany <k...@google.com> wrote: >>> > Hi >>> > >>> > I wrote a test for "-fsanitize-coverage=trace-cmp" . >>

Re: Add fuzzing coverage support

On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 11:51 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > On Wed, Dec 02, 2015 at 05:55:29PM +0100, Dmitry Vyukov wrote: >> Can you point to some concrete coding style violations (besides >> function comments)? >> >> >> > We seem to have no established process for deciding whether

Re: [PATCH] Disable ODR checking in libsanitizer

23, 2015 at 3:02 PM, Kostya Serebryany k...@google.com wrote: Looks good. I am not planing to work on the fix any time soon, co I encourage you or someone else interested to send patches to fix the problem in LLVM. Since you are also committing a test we should not accidentally remove

Re: Revert libsanitizer patches or fix 59009

On Sat, Nov 16, 2013 at 7:59 AM, John David Anglin dave.ang...@bell.net wrote: As far as I can tell, libsanitizer works on hppa-linux. So, the change could be added to the llvm tree. However, I'm unlikely to test anything in the tree unless someone tells me there's something to test.

Re: [PATCH]: backport fix for PR sanitizer/58994

on x86_64-apple-darwin12 and x86_64-apple-darwin13. Jack ps Kostya, can you handled the commit? Thanks in advance. Will do (tomorrow) --kcc 2013-11-14 Kostya Serebryany k...@google.com Jack Howarth howa...@bromo.med.uc.edu libsanitizer/ PR

Re: Revert libsanitizer patches or fix 59009

On Wed, Nov 13, 2013 at 9:21 AM, Michael Meissner meiss...@linux.vnet.ibm.com wrote: On Wed, Nov 13, 2013 at 10:45:54AM +0400, Kostya Serebryany wrote: Many thanks, Jakub. I don't want to appear in this situation again. Would you suggest a place to create a wiki page which would list all

Re: Revert libsanitizer patches or fix 59009

will not be able to work on it again in nearest months, which means 4.9 will not get updated asan. How bad that is -- I don't know. --kcc On Tue, Nov 12, 2013 at 9:40 AM, Kostya Serebryany k...@google.com wrote: So far I was not able to reproduce the compilation failure -- and I am asking someone from

Re: Revert libsanitizer patches or fix 59009

or, alternatively, we can disable libsanitizer on PowerPC if the PowerPC community does not care enough about it being healthy. On Tue, Nov 12, 2013 at 9:41 AM, Kostya Serebryany k...@google.com wrote: [plain text] So far I was not able to reproduce the compilation failure -- and I am asking

Re: Revert libsanitizer patches or fix 59009

On Tue, Nov 12, 2013 at 10:04 AM, Michael Meissner meiss...@linux.vnet.ibm.com wrote: On Tue, Nov 12, 2013 at 09:43:38AM -0800, Kostya Serebryany wrote: or, alternatively, we can disable libsanitizer on PowerPC if the PowerPC community does not care enough about it being healthy. I think

Re: Revert libsanitizer patches or fix 59009

On Tue, Nov 12, 2013 at 10:57 AM, Jakub Jelinek ja...@redhat.com wrote: On Tue, Nov 12, 2013 at 10:07:32AM -0800, Kostya Serebryany wrote: On Tue, Nov 12, 2013 at 10:04 AM, Michael Meissner meiss...@linux.vnet.ibm.com wrote: On Tue, Nov 12, 2013 at 09:43:38AM -0800, Kostya Serebryany wrote

Re: Revert libsanitizer patches or fix 59009

On Tue, Nov 12, 2013 at 11:30 AM, Jakub Jelinek ja...@redhat.com wrote: On Tue, Nov 12, 2013 at 10:59:12AM -0800, Kostya Serebryany wrote: This is all dead code in gcc repo. This is why I am asking for any quick #ifdef. in clang repo this code is used by MemorySanitizer (and will be used

Re: Revert libsanitizer patches or fix 59009

Many thanks, Jakub. I don't want to appear in this situation again. Would you suggest a place to create a wiki page which would list all required steps to test libsanitizer? libsanitizer is (unfortunately) a very system-dependent beast and our upstream commits will break other platforms

libsanitizer/README.gcc update

Kostya Serebryany k...@google.com +* README.gcc: Extend the README.gcc with mode details. + 2012-11-20 Konstantin Serebryany konstantin.s.serebry...@gmail.com * sanitizer_common/sanitizer_linux.cc Index: README.gcc

Re: libsanitizer/README.gcc update

Done, thanks! --kcc On Wed, Nov 21, 2012 at 6:44 PM, Jakub Jelinek ja...@redhat.com wrote: On Wed, Nov 21, 2012 at 06:36:32PM +0400, Kostya Serebryany wrote: This patch updates libsanitizer/README.gcc. Ok? (This is the first time I am trying to commit to gcc trunk) Index: ChangeLog

[libsanitizer] a script to help merging asan from upstream

Hi, A dummy script to help merging asan from upstream. Not 100% complete, but should be enough to complete the current merge. You suggestions on how to improve it (or how to do w/o it) are welcome, but I really wish to do the first merge tomorrow to unblock other folks. Thanks, --kcc

Re: [libsanitizer] a script to help merging asan from upstream

-- exit if it is not 2) clean up the upstream directory after the merge is done. David On Wed, Nov 21, 2012 at 10:25 AM, Kostya Serebryany k...@google.com wrote: Hi, A dummy script to help merging asan from upstream. Not 100% complete, but should be enough to complete the current merge

Re: Asan/Tsan Unit/Regression testing (was [asan] Emit GIMPLE direclty, small cleanups)

On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 4:26 PM, Xinliang David Li davi...@google.com wrote: As asan/tsan functionality is getting into trunk, we need to set up testings as soon as possible to avoid bitrot. Kostya can probably shed some lights on the test case requirements, and we can continue discussions on

[google] AddressSanitizer for gcc, first attempt. (issue5272048)

by Kostya Serebryany k...@google.com + +This file is part of GCC. + +GCC is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify it under +the terms of the GNU General Public License as published by the Free +Software Foundation; either version 3, or (at your option) any later +version. + +GCC