On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 8:22 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>
> On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 08:17:34PM +0400, Dmitry Vyukov wrote:
> > +2012-11-15 Dmitry Vyukov
> > +
> > + * MAINTAINERS: (libsanitizer, asan.c): Add myself,
> > + Kostya Serebryany (k...@google.com) and
> > + Jakub Jelinek (ja...@redhat.c
On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 08:17:34PM +0400, Dmitry Vyukov wrote:
> +2012-11-15 Dmitry Vyukov
> +
> + * MAINTAINERS: (libsanitizer, asan.c): Add myself,
> + Kostya Serebryany (k...@google.com) and
> + Jakub Jelinek (ja...@redhat.com).
> + Rename area for Dodji Seketeli (do...@redhat.com).
If there
On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 07:07:46PM +0400, Dmitry Vyukov wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 6:56 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>
> > On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 06:54:43PM +0400, Dmitry Vyukov wrote:
> > > Yes, I think people will search by "libsanitizer" (or "asan").
> > >
> > > Do I need to add Jakub Jelin
On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 9:37 AM, Richard Earnshaw wrote:
> [1] Am I the only one who finds the name somewhat cryptic?
It's just a name :) No more cryptic than "mudflap". Took me a while
to get used to that one!
Kostya et al have a family of sanitizers now and they are all
abbreviated similar
On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 06:54:43PM +0400, Dmitry Vyukov wrote:
> Yes, I think people will search by "libsanitizer" (or "asan").
>
> Do I need to add Jakub Jelinek as reviewer as well?
I can add myself after you commit it, or you can add me.
Jakub
On 2012-11-15 09:43 , Dmitry Vyukov wrote:
Does it look better? (still in Reviewers section)
Looks fine. Thanks.
Incidentally, Dodji, now that I look at your entry. I think making
yours state "libsanitizer, asan.c" would be better.
Diego.
Dmitry Vyukov writes:
> To what section do I need to add myself? There are "Reviewers" and
> "Various Maintainers".
"Reviewers" since that's what the Steering Committee's message mentioned.
Rainer
--
-
Rainer
On 15/11/12 12:38, Dodji Seketeli wrote:
diff --git a/MAINTAINERS b/MAINTAINERS
index adec7a4..825c602 100644
--- a/MAINTAINERS
+++ b/MAINTAINERS
@@ -294,6 +294,7 @@ register allocation Peter Bergner
berg...@vnet.ibm.com
register allocation Kenneth Zadeck zad...@naturalbri
Dmitry Vyukov writes:
> Does it look good to you (not yet committed)?
> (Dodji, I've replaced spaces with tabs in your record)
[...]
> Index: MAINTAINERS
> ===
> --- MAINTAINERS (revision 193530)
> +++ MAINTAINERS (working copy)
> @@
Diego Novillo writes:
> (Adding ASAN maintainers to the CC)
>
> On Wed, Nov 14, 2012 at 7:55 AM, H.J. Lu wrote:
>> On Wed, Nov 14, 2012 at 4:44 AM, Rainer Orth
>>>
>>> Btw., currently there's no libsanitizer maintainer listed in
>>> MAINTAINERS. This needs to change.
>>>
>>
>> That is the real
(Adding ASAN maintainers to the CC)
On Wed, Nov 14, 2012 at 7:55 AM, H.J. Lu wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 14, 2012 at 4:44 AM, Rainer Orth
>>
>> Btw., currently there's no libsanitizer maintainer listed in
>> MAINTAINERS. This needs to change.
>>
>
> That is the real problem. We need a GCC libsanitize
Rainer Orth writes:
> "H.J. Lu" writes:
>> We don't have a maintainer is a problem, not go upstream first.
> Agreed. I've no idea if the SC appointed one when it accepted
> libsanitizer etc. into GCC.
Instead of guessing and complaining about the GCC SC, have you two
thought of actually looki
On Wed, Nov 14, 2012 at 5:25 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 14, 2012 at 04:26:09AM -0800, H.J. Lu wrote:
>> 2012-11-14 H.J. Lu
>>
>> * Copied from llvm at revision 167890.
>>
>> diff --git a/libsanitizer/asan/asan_allocator.cc
>> b/libsanitizer/asan/asan_allocator.cc
>> index 3a9
On Wed, Nov 14, 2012 at 04:26:09AM -0800, H.J. Lu wrote:
> 2012-11-14 H.J. Lu
>
> * Copied from llvm at revision 167890.
>
> diff --git a/libsanitizer/asan/asan_allocator.cc
> b/libsanitizer/asan/asan_allocator.cc
> index 3a92802..de37137 100644
> --- a/libsanitizer/asan/asan_allocator.
"H.J. Lu" writes:
> We don't have a maintainer is a problem, not go upstream first.
Agreed. I've no idea if the SC appointed one when it accepted
libsanitizer etc. into GCC.
> I have a patch pending to enable mulltib. But libsanitizer doesn't
> work on x32 and it doesn't cause bootstrap probl
On Wed, Nov 14, 2012 at 5:01 AM, Rainer Orth
wrote:
> "H.J. Lu" writes:
>
I think all changes should go upstream first. It was a mistake
to check sparc changes into GCC tree.
>>>
>>> I disagree, as do others: it is undesirable for gcc maintainers to have
>>> to interact with many diffe
"H.J. Lu" writes:
>>> I think all changes should go upstream first. It was a mistake
>>> to check sparc changes into GCC tree.
>>
>> I disagree, as do others: it is undesirable for gcc maintainers to have
>> to interact with many different upstream communities to get their
>> changes in. This i
On Wed, Nov 14, 2012 at 4:44 AM, Rainer Orth
wrote:
> "H.J. Lu" writes:
>
>>> I don't think removing this code is desirable. As discussed, there
>>> needs to be one of the libsanitizer maintainers who takes care of
>>> porting changes from the GCC side to upstream and importing upstream, as
>>>
"H.J. Lu" writes:
>> I don't think removing this code is desirable. As discussed, there
>> needs to be one of the libsanitizer maintainers who takes care of
>> porting changes from the GCC side to upstream and importing upstream, as
>> Ian does for libgo.
>
> I think all changes should go upstre
On Wed, Nov 14, 2012 at 4:36 AM, Rainer Orth
wrote:
> "H.J. Lu" writes:
>
>> diff --git a/libsanitizer/asan/asan_linux.cc
>> b/libsanitizer/asan/asan_linux.cc
>> index ea7ee9e..5c52ddc 100644
>> --- a/libsanitizer/asan/asan_linux.cc
>> +++ b/libsanitizer/asan/asan_linux.cc
>> @@ -1,5 +1,7 @@
>>
"H.J. Lu" writes:
> diff --git a/libsanitizer/asan/asan_linux.cc b/libsanitizer/asan/asan_linux.cc
> index ea7ee9e..5c52ddc 100644
> --- a/libsanitizer/asan/asan_linux.cc
> +++ b/libsanitizer/asan/asan_linux.cc
> @@ -1,5 +1,7 @@
> //===-- asan_linux.cc
>
21 matches
Mail list logo
