On 30.10.2017 08:24, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 26, 2017 at 09:50:43PM +0200, Kamil Rytarowski wrote:
>> $ make check-asan
>> $ make check-asan-dynamic
>> $ make check-ubsan
> 
> That is testing of the upstream code, not of GCC and the libsanitizer
> copy in GCC.  What I'm more interested to hear is whether
> you've bootstrapped/regtested the gcc tree with this patch on
> x86_64-*-netbsd*, as per https://gcc.gnu.org/contribute.html
> I.e. ..../configure ...; make -jN bootstrap; make -jN -k check; 
> ..../contrib/test_summary
> and from there if there are any */asan/* or */ubsan/* FAILs.
> 
I've been executing GCC tests.

Some/many tests were hanging and I was killing them after a longer
period of time. There were certainly environment issues, like attempts
to execute non-existent 'python' (in pkgsrc/NetBSD we version python to
python2.7, python3.6 etc).

http://netbsd.org/~kamil/gcc/test_summary.log.8-20171022.txt

It looks like the tests complains for asan, and nothing complains for
ubsan. I expect that the reporting issue in asan/GCC is generating these
results.

>> 2017-10-26  Kamil Rytarowski  <n...@gmx.com>
>>
>>      * sanitizer_common/Makefile.am (sanitizer_common_files): Add
>>      sanitizer_platform_limits_netbsd.cc.
>>      * sanitizer_common/Makefile.in: Regenerated.
>>      * configure.tgt: Enable asan and ubsan on x86_64-*-netbsd*.
> 
>       Jakub
> 


Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Reply via email to