On Tue, Jun 20, 2017 at 10:18:20AM +0200, Richard Biener wrote:
> > Ok (of course, will handle this separately from the rest).
>
> Yes. Note I didn't look at the actual patch (yet).
I'd like to ping the -fsanitize=pointer-overflow patch (though if you're
busy, it can certainly wait a few weeks).
On Wed, 21 Jun 2017, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 20, 2017 at 10:18:20AM +0200, Richard Biener wrote:
> > > It would be an attempt to avoid sanitizing int foo (int *p) { return
> > > p[10] + p[-5]; }
> > > (when the offset is constant and small and we dereference it).
> > > If there is no p
On Wed, 21 Jun 2017, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 20, 2017 at 09:41:43AM +0200, Richard Biener wrote:
> > > 2) libcpp/line-map.c has this:
> > > static int
> > > location_adhoc_data_update (void **slot, void *data)
> > > {
> > > *((char **) slot) += *((int64_t *) data);
> > > return 1;
>
On Tue, Jun 20, 2017 at 09:41:43AM +0200, Richard Biener wrote:
> > 2) libcpp/line-map.c has this:
> > static int
> > location_adhoc_data_update (void **slot, void *data)
> > {
> > *((char **) slot) += *((int64_t *) data);
> > return 1;
> > }
> > where the (why int64_t always?, we really need j
On Tue, Jun 20, 2017 at 10:18:20AM +0200, Richard Biener wrote:
> > It would be an attempt to avoid sanitizing int foo (int *p) { return p[10]
> > + p[-5]; }
> > (when the offset is constant and small and we dereference it).
> > If there is no page mapped at NULL or at the highest page in the virt
On Tue, 20 Jun 2017, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 20, 2017 at 09:41:43AM +0200, Richard Biener wrote:
> > On Mon, 19 Jun 2017, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> >
> > > Hi!
> > >
> > > The following patch adds -fsanitize=pointer-overflow support,
> > > which adds instrumentation (included in -fsaniti
On Tue, Jun 20, 2017 at 09:41:43AM +0200, Richard Biener wrote:
> On Mon, 19 Jun 2017, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>
> > Hi!
> >
> > The following patch adds -fsanitize=pointer-overflow support,
> > which adds instrumentation (included in -fsanitize=undefined) that checks
> > that pointer arithmetics do
On Mon, 19 Jun 2017, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> Hi!
>
> The following patch adds -fsanitize=pointer-overflow support,
> which adds instrumentation (included in -fsanitize=undefined) that checks
> that pointer arithmetics doesn't wrap. If the offset on ptr p+ off when
> treating
> it as signed value
Hi!
The following patch adds -fsanitize=pointer-overflow support,
which adds instrumentation (included in -fsanitize=undefined) that checks
that pointer arithmetics doesn't wrap. If the offset on ptr p+ off when
treating
it as signed value is non-negative, we check whether the result is bigger
(
