On Tue, Nov 13, 2012 at 2:26 PM, Konstantin Serebryany <konstantin.s.serebry...@gmail.com> wrote: > H.J., > Question about this patch. > Will it work if we simply replace > #if __WORDSIZE == 64 > with > #ifdef x86_64 > ? > > Today, x86_64 is the only 64-bit architecture supported by asan > run-time on linux anyway.
Because x86_64 is defined even for x32. And it is the only one currently supported does not mean there will be more in the future. Thanks, Andrew Pinski > > > On Tue, Nov 13, 2012 at 1:53 PM, H.J. Lu <hjl.to...@gmail.com> wrote: >> On Tue, Nov 13, 2012 at 1:40 PM, Konstantin Serebryany >> <konstantin.s.serebry...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> On Tue, Nov 13, 2012 at 3:42 AM, Jakub Jelinek <ja...@redhat.com> wrote: >>>> On Tue, Nov 13, 2012 at 03:31:21AM -0800, H.J. Lu wrote: >>>>> On Tue, Nov 13, 2012 at 3:20 AM, Dodji Seketeli <do...@redhat.com> wrote: >>>>> > Diego Novillo <dnovi...@google.com> a écrit: >>>>> > >>>>> >> Patches to libsanitizer should be sent upstream. We should only >>>>> >> contain a copy of the master in the LLVM repository. There should be >>>>> >> instructions in libsanitizer/README.gcc (Jakub, Dodji, are they there? >>>>> >> I can't check ATM). >>>>> > >>>>> > No there are not, for the moment. README.gcc just says where the >>>>> > sources the 'upstream' project is. >>>>> > >>>>> >>>>> What is the plan to add GCC specific support: >>>>> >>>>> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55291 >>>>> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55292 >>>>> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55304 >>>>> >>>>> and >>>>> >>>>> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2012-11/msg00967.html >>>> >>>> CCing Wei, I don't know the details about the import. To me it looks like >>>> that most or all of the libsanitizer/ level files (and >>>> libsanitizer/*/Makefile.{am,in}) don't originate from >>>> llvm/projects/compiler-rt/lib , so they should be owned by GCC and thus >>>> should be changed to support multilibs, use the same libtool/autoconf/etc. >>>> versions as rest of gcc etc. >>> >>> >>> Correct. Whatever happens to Makefile, configure and other non-.{cc,h} >>> files is a purely GCC thing. >>> >>>> >>>> For changes to the files actually imported from LLVM I guess it depends on >>>> if google is going to accept such changes in the LLVM upstream. >>> >>> Yes, we are willing to support any changes that make libasan support >>> more targets. >>> We would prefer all patches to go through LLVM first, and then ported >>> to GCC by copying files verbatim >>> This is the only way we can cope with the two versions. >>> (Wei, we will need the exact details for doing this in the README file) >>> >> >> Could someone please check this patch: >> >> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2012-11/msg00951.html >> >> into upstream? >> >> Thanks. >> >> >> -- >> H.J.
