On 2024/08/16 17:46, Richard Henderson wrote:
On 8/16/24 18:27, Akihiko Odaki wrote:
On 2024/08/16 17:24, Thomas Huth wrote:
On 16/08/2024 10.21, Akihiko Odaki wrote:
On 2024/08/16 17:03, Thomas Huth wrote:
On 16/08/2024 09.30, Akihiko Odaki wrote:
On 2024/08/16 16:27, Thomas Huth wrote:
On 16/08/2024 09.12, Akihiko Odaki wrote:
On 2024/08/16 16:03, Thomas Huth wrote:
On 16/08/2024 08.22, Akihiko Odaki wrote:
Commit 23ef50ae2d0c (".gitlab-ci.d/buildtest.yml: Use
-fno-sanitize=function in the clang-system job") adds
-fno-sanitize=function for the CI but doesn't add the flag in the
other context. Add it to meson.build for such. It is not
removed from
.gitlab-ci.d/buildtest.yml because -fno-sanitize=function in
meson.build
does not affect --extra-cflags due to argument ordering.
Signed-off-by: Akihiko Odaki <[email protected]>
---
Changes in v3:
- I was not properly dropping the change of
.gitlab-ci.d/buildtest.yml
but only updated the message. v3 fixes this. (Thomas Huth)
- Link to v2: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20240729-function-
[email protected]
Changes in v2:
- Dropped the change of: .gitlab-ci.d/buildtest.yml
- Link to v1:
https://lore.kernel.org/r/20240714-function-v1-1-
[email protected]
---
meson.build | 1 +
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
diff --git a/meson.build b/meson.build
index 5613b62a4f42..a4169c572ba9 100644
--- a/meson.build
+++ b/meson.build
@@ -609,6 +609,7 @@ if host_os != 'openbsd' and \
endif
qemu_common_flags +=
cc.get_supported_arguments(hardening_flags)
+qemu_common_flags +=
cc.get_supported_arguments('-fno-sanitize=function')
As I mentioned in my last mail: I think it would make sense to
move this at the end of the "if get_option('tsan')" block in
meson.build, since this apparently only fixes the use of
"--enable-sanitizers", and cannot fix the "--extra-cflags" that
a user might have specified?
Sorry, I missed it. It cannot fix --extra-cflags, but it should
be able to fix compiler flags specified by compiler distributor.
Oh, you mean that there are distros that enable
-fsanitize=function by default? Can you name one? If so, I think
that information should go into the patch description...?
No, it is just a precaution.
Ok. I don't think any normal distro will enable this by default
since this impacts performance of the programs, so it's either the
user specifying --enable-sanitizers or the user specifying
--extra-cflags="-fsanitize=...". In the latter case, your patch
does not help. In the former case, I think this setting should go
into the same code block as where we set -fsanitize=undefined in
our meson.build file, so that it is clear where it belongs to.
It does not look like -fno-sanitize=function belongs to the code
block to me. Putting - fno-sanitize=function in the code block will
make it seem to say that we should disable function sanitizer
because the user requests to enable sanitizers, which makes little
sense.
As far as I understood, -fsanitize=undefine turns on
-fsanitize=function, too, or did I get that wrong?
If not, how did you run into this problem? How did you enable the
function sanitizer if not using --enable-sanitizers ?
The point is we don't care who enables sanitizers, and unconditonally
setting -fno- sanitize=function will clarify that.
Argument ordering is important. You cannot just drop this in the middle
of meson.build and expect anything reasonable to happen.
That is a good point. We should add -fno-sanitize=function immediately
after -fsanitize=undefined; I will submit v4 with that change.
Regards,
Akihiko Odaki
