This is the mail archive of the libc-alpha@sourceware.org mailing list for the glibc project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: [PATCH BZ#20422] Do not allow asan/msan/tsan and fortify at the same time.


* Jakub Jelinek:

> Because you really don't know what kind of information will each tool want
> to know, and that can significantly differ between valgrind, [amt]san etc.
> In sanitizer_common, you can come up with some macros that will serve the
> needs of all the tools, and have each tool use those macros, other than
> that, it is a trivial 3 liner wrapper for each fortification function.

Uh-oh, would you subject matter experts please come up with a
consistent opinion what is *actually* needed?

Further up thread, in
<CAJOtW+7xjtx=DxEOSnaPfpU708RdUJYLRX8prv0bFW=x47+tmA@mail.gmail.com>,
Yuri Gribov said that the sanitizers will work fine despite the
additional indirection.

If this is not actually true, then of course it does not make sense to
maintain the unfortify bits in glibc.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]