On Tue, May 07, 2013 at 02:31:05PM +0200, Christophe Lyon wrote:
> On 7 May 2013 14:22, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> > On Tue, May 07, 2013 at 02:18:35PM +0200, Christophe Lyon wrote:
> >> Thanks for your review, here is a new version taking your comments into
> >> account.
> >>
> >> Christophe.
> >>
>
On 7 May 2013 14:22, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Tue, May 07, 2013 at 02:18:35PM +0200, Christophe Lyon wrote:
>> Thanks for your review, here is a new version taking your comments into
>> account.
>>
>> Christophe.
>>
>> 2013-05-06 Christophe Lyon
>
> Two spaces before <, instead of just one.
>
On Tue, May 07, 2013 at 02:18:35PM +0200, Christophe Lyon wrote:
> Thanks for your review, here is a new version taking your comments into
> account.
>
> Christophe.
>
> 2013-05-06 Christophe Lyon
Two spaces before <, instead of just one.
Otherwise it looks good to me, but if it depends on th
Thanks for your review, here is a new version taking your comments into account.
Christophe.
2013-05-06 Christophe Lyon
gcc/
* config/arm/arm.c (arm_asan_shadow_offset): New function.
(TARGET_ASAN_SHADOW_OFFSET): Define.
* config/arm/linux-eabi.h (ASAN_CC1_SPEC): Define.
(L
On Mon, May 06, 2013 at 08:52:21PM +0200, Christophe Lyon wrote:
> --- a/gcc/config/arm/arm.c
> +++ b/gcc/config/arm/arm.c
> @@ -281,6 +281,8 @@ static unsigned arm_add_stmt_cost (void *data, int count,
>
> static void arm_canonicalize_comparison (int *code, rtx *op0, rtx *op1,
>
The rest of the patch is gcc-specific. Jakub?
On Tue, May 7, 2013 at 12:12 PM, Christophe Lyon
wrote:
> Oops, you are correct, I read the code too quickly and didn't notice
> the #endif right after the Thumb bit cancellation (I thought the
> function didn't return any value when on ARM).
>
> A wh
Oops, you are correct, I read the code too quickly and didn't notice
the #endif right after the Thumb bit cancellation (I thought the
function didn't return any value when on ARM).
A white line before #if defined(__powerpc__) would help readability :-)
Forget that part.
Thanks,
Christophe.
On Tue, May 7, 2013 at 9:33 AM, Konstantin Serebryany
wrote:
> +euge...@google.com (our ARM expert)
>
> Christophe,
>
> The change in sanitizer_common/sanitizer_stacktrace.cc changes the
> logic which is known to work well for us on Android/ARM.
> I'd like Evgeniy to comment on it.
>
> --kcc
>
> O
+euge...@google.com (our ARM expert)
Christophe,
The change in sanitizer_common/sanitizer_stacktrace.cc changes the
logic which is known to work well for us on Android/ARM.
I'd like Evgeniy to comment on it.
--kcc
On Mon, May 6, 2013 at 10:52 PM, Christophe Lyon
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Here is a 2nd
Hi,
Here is a 2nd attempt at enabling libsanitizer on ARM.
Compared with the previous version, this patch is more intrusive to
workaround some limitations with qemu:
* qemu does not work well with threads, so I chose to disable
clone-test-1.c and rlimit-mmap-test-1.c when running on a simulator.
10 matches
Mail list logo