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 >
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature