On Tue, Nov 12, 2013 at 10:07:32AM -0800, Kostya Serebryany wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 12, 2013 at 10:04 AM, Michael Meissner
> <[email protected]> wrote:
> > On Tue, Nov 12, 2013 at 09:43:38AM -0800, Kostya Serebryany wrote:
> >> or, alternatively, we can disable libsanitizer on PowerPC if the
> >> PowerPC community does not care enough about it being healthy.
> >
> > I think there should be a global --enable-libsanitizer or whatever option
> > that
> > would allow people to enable it. It should only be default on x86_64 until
> > people are motivated to fix libsantizer on all instances of the platform.
>
> I don't mind that.
Perhaps I'm totally blind, but how exactly are the
sanitizer_common_syscalls.inc interceptors used (seems most of the portability
trouble is caused by that)? I see it defines tons of functions like
__sanitizer_syscall_post_impl_*
__sanitizer_syscall_pre_impl_*
but I couldn't find anything actually referencing those symbols. Is that
just dead code for the time being?
Jakub
