On Sat, 17 Dec 2022 06:39:48 GMT, Justin King wrote:
>> Allow building OpenJDK with UBSan. Currently the build fails when optimizing
>> the image due to lots of undefined behavior (it invokes the built JVM).
>> Follow up PRs will either replace the undefined behavior with well defined
>> behav
On Sat, 17 Dec 2022 06:39:48 GMT, Justin King wrote:
>> Allow building OpenJDK with UBSan. Currently the build fails when optimizing
>> the image due to lots of undefined behavior (it invokes the built JVM).
>> Follow up PRs will either replace the undefined behavior with well defined
>> behav
On Fri, 16 Dec 2022 16:10:10 GMT, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote:
>> Justin King has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
>> commit since the last revision:
>>
>> Simplify logic for including __ubsan_default_options
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Justin King
>
> I much also check:
On Sat, 17 Dec 2022 06:39:48 GMT, Justin King wrote:
>> Allow building OpenJDK with UBSan. Currently the build fails when optimizing
>> the image due to lots of undefined behavior (it invokes the built JVM).
>> Follow up PRs will either replace the undefined behavior with well defined
>> behav
On Sat, 17 Dec 2022 06:33:43 GMT, Justin King wrote:
>> Allow building OpenJDK with UBSan. Currently the build fails when optimizing
>> the image due to lots of undefined behavior (it invokes the built JVM).
>> Follow up PRs will either replace the undefined behavior with well defined
>> behav
On Fri, 16 Dec 2022 15:56:44 GMT, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote:
> However, I do think the included source files should be treated like the
> autoheaders, and reside in data rather than in `src`. The latter is intended
> for buildtools, even though they are a bit scattered at the moment (there is
>
> Allow building OpenJDK with UBSan. Currently the build fails when optimizing
> the image due to lots of undefined behavior (it invokes the built JVM).
> Follow up PRs will either replace the undefined behavior with well defined
> behavior or suppress errors which are intentional. The goal is t
> Allow building OpenJDK with UBSan. Currently the build fails when optimizing
> the image due to lots of undefined behavior (it invokes the built JVM).
> Follow up PRs will either replace the undefined behavior with well defined
> behavior or suppress errors which are intentional. The goal is t
On Mon, 12 Dec 2022 10:42:22 GMT, Justin King wrote:
>> Allow building OpenJDK with UBSan. Currently the build fails when optimizing
>> the image due to lots of undefined behavior (it invokes the built JVM).
>> Follow up PRs will either replace the undefined behavior with well defined
>> behav
On Fri, 9 Dec 2022 20:38:26 GMT, Erik Joelsson wrote:
>> make/autoconf/jdk-options.m4 line 450:
>>
>>> 448:
>>> ###
>>> 449: #
>>> 450: # UndefinedBehaviorSanitizer
>>
>> I think this logic fits better in `flags.m4`, o
On Mon, 12 Dec 2022 10:42:22 GMT, Justin King wrote:
>> Allow building OpenJDK with UBSan. Currently the build fails when optimizing
>> the image due to lots of undefined behavior (it invokes the built JVM).
>> Follow up PRs will either replace the undefined behavior with well defined
>> behav
On Tue, 13 Dec 2022 16:55:09 GMT, Robbin Ehn wrote:
> > I guess the advantage to putting this in the build machinery (as opposed to
> > using `--with-extra-cflags=-fsanitize=undefined
> > --with-extra-ldflags=-fsanitize=undefined`) is that we can turn some of
> > these onn by default once we'v
On Tue, 13 Dec 2022 13:45:04 GMT, Justin King wrote:
> Nope. Some targets end up passing C++ flags to the C compiler, causing a
> failure.
Ah right, we (mis)use CFLAGS (instead of CXXFLAGS) in some
SetupNativeCompilation calls when all source files are C++. In that case, your
suggested patch
On Tue, 13 Dec 2022 16:29:59 GMT, Justin King wrote:
> I guess the advantage to putting this in the build machinery (as opposed to
> using `--with-extra-cflags=-fsanitize=undefined
> --with-extra-ldflags=-fsanitize=undefined`) is that we can turn some of these
> onn by default once we've fixed
On Mon, 12 Dec 2022 10:42:22 GMT, Justin King wrote:
>> Allow building OpenJDK with UBSan. Currently the build fails when optimizing
>> the image due to lots of undefined behavior (it invokes the built JVM).
>> Follow up PRs will either replace the undefined behavior with well defined
>> behav
On Mon, 12 Dec 2022 10:42:22 GMT, Justin King wrote:
>> Allow building OpenJDK with UBSan. Currently the build fails when optimizing
>> the image due to lots of undefined behavior (it invokes the built JVM).
>> Follow up PRs will either replace the undefined behavior with well defined
>> behav
On Mon, 12 Dec 2022 10:42:22 GMT, Justin King wrote:
>> Allow building OpenJDK with UBSan. Currently the build fails when optimizing
>> the image due to lots of undefined behavior (it invokes the built JVM).
>> Follow up PRs will either replace the undefined behavior with well defined
>> behav
On Tue, 13 Dec 2022 08:17:09 GMT, Justin King wrote:
> I tried to use a single file, but the build logic attempts to compile as
> either C or C++ based on file extensions, and has logic based on it. So if I
> use `.cpp` and the target is all `.c` odd things happen. The same for the
> inverse.
On Mon, 12 Dec 2022 10:42:22 GMT, Justin King wrote:
>> Allow building OpenJDK with UBSan. Currently the build fails when optimizing
>> the image due to lots of undefined behavior (it invokes the built JVM).
>> Follow up PRs will either replace the undefined behavior with well defined
>> behav
On Mon, 12 Dec 2022 10:42:22 GMT, Justin King wrote:
>> Allow building OpenJDK with UBSan. Currently the build fails when optimizing
>> the image due to lots of undefined behavior (it invokes the built JVM).
>> Follow up PRs will either replace the undefined behavior with well defined
>> behav
On Tue, 13 Dec 2022 00:37:42 GMT, David Holmes wrote:
>> Primarily, but its not a requirement. We should also be able to invoke
>> `java` as is. The environment variables should be used to force specific
>> behavior for a single invocation. Otherwise, if one forgets to pass the
>> environment
On Mon, 12 Dec 2022 08:04:57 GMT, Justin King wrote:
>> src/java.base/share/native/launcher/main.c line 41:
>>
>>> 39: // extremely early during library loading, before main is called. We
>>> need to override the default
>>> 40: // options because by default UBSan only prints a warning for each
On Mon, 12 Dec 2022 09:58:54 GMT, Justin King wrote:
>> src/java.base/share/native/launcher/main.c line 49:
>>
>>> 47: #endif // UNDEFINED_BEHAVIOR_SANITIZER
>>> 48:
>>> 49: /*
>>
>> As I said we have more launcher than 'java', if you put this method here you
>> must put it in all launchers.
> Allow building OpenJDK with UBSan. Currently the build fails when optimizing
> the image due to lots of undefined behavior (it invokes the built JVM).
> Follow up PRs will either replace the undefined behavior with well defined
> behavior or suppress errors which are intentional. The goal is t
> Allow building OpenJDK with UBSan. Currently the build fails when optimizing
> the image due to lots of undefined behavior (it invokes the built JVM).
> Follow up PRs will either replace the undefined behavior with well defined
> behavior or suppress errors which are intentional. The goal is t
On Mon, 12 Dec 2022 09:50:33 GMT, Justin King wrote:
>> Allow building OpenJDK with UBSan. Currently the build fails when optimizing
>> the image due to lots of undefined behavior (it invokes the built JVM).
>> Follow up PRs will either replace the undefined behavior with well defined
>> behav
On Mon, 12 Dec 2022 08:14:51 GMT, Robbin Ehn wrote:
>> Justin King has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
>> commit since the last revision:
>>
>> Add comment explaining __ubsan_default_options and UBSAN_OPTIONS
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Justin King
>
> src/java.base/
> Allow building OpenJDK with UBSan. Currently the build fails when optimizing
> the image due to lots of undefined behavior (it invokes the built JVM).
> Follow up PRs will either replace the undefined behavior with well defined
> behavior or suppress errors which are intentional. The goal is t
> Allow building OpenJDK with UBSan. Currently the build fails when optimizing
> the image due to lots of undefined behavior (it invokes the built JVM).
> Follow up PRs will either replace the undefined behavior with well defined
> behavior or suppress errors which are intentional. The goal is t
> Allow building OpenJDK with UBSan. Currently the build fails when optimizing
> the image due to lots of undefined behavior (it invokes the built JVM).
> Follow up PRs will either replace the undefined behavior with well defined
> behavior or suppress errors which are intentional. The goal is t
On Mon, 12 Dec 2022 07:02:04 GMT, Justin King wrote:
>> Allow building OpenJDK with UBSan. Currently the build fails when optimizing
>> the image due to lots of undefined behavior (it invokes the built JVM).
>> Follow up PRs will either replace the undefined behavior with well defined
>> behav
On Mon, 12 Dec 2022 07:26:21 GMT, David Holmes wrote:
>> Justin King has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
>> commit since the last revision:
>>
>> Add comment explaining __ubsan_default_options and UBSAN_OPTIONS
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Justin King
>
> src/java.bas
On Mon, 12 Dec 2022 07:02:04 GMT, Justin King wrote:
>> Allow building OpenJDK with UBSan. Currently the build fails when optimizing
>> the image due to lots of undefined behavior (it invokes the built JVM).
>> Follow up PRs will either replace the undefined behavior with well defined
>> behav
On Mon, 12 Dec 2022 06:48:25 GMT, David Holmes wrote:
>> Justin King has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
>> commit since the last revision:
>>
>> Remove UBSAN_ENABLED From spec.gmk.in
>
> src/java.base/share/native/launcher/main.c line 38:
>
>> 36:
>> 37: #ifdef U
On Mon, 12 Dec 2022 06:47:44 GMT, David Holmes wrote:
>> Yeah, it is unfortunate. However there is no other way to actually set the
>> defaults nicely. The other alternative is to use environment variables, but
>> they are easy to forget when invoking the launcher manually.
>
> Does the env-var
> Allow building OpenJDK with UBSan. Currently the build fails when optimizing
> the image due to lots of undefined behavior (it invokes the built JVM).
> Follow up PRs will either replace the undefined behavior with well defined
> behavior or suppress errors which are intentional. The goal is t
On Mon, 12 Dec 2022 05:59:19 GMT, Justin King wrote:
>> Allow building OpenJDK with UBSan. Currently the build fails when optimizing
>> the image due to lots of undefined behavior (it invokes the built JVM).
>> Follow up PRs will either replace the undefined behavior with well defined
>> behav
On Mon, 12 Dec 2022 05:51:52 GMT, Justin King wrote:
>> src/java.base/share/native/launcher/main.c line 37:
>>
>>> 35: #include "jni.h"
>>> 36:
>>> 37: #ifdef UNDEFINED_BEHAVIOR_SANITIZER
>>
>> I really do not like having to make source code changes to accommodate these
>> kinds of tools.
>
>
On Mon, 12 Dec 2022 04:34:07 GMT, David Holmes wrote:
>>> I think it requires much broader discussion as to whether OpenJDK is
>>> actively seen to endorse these tools. Why these tools? What if there are
>>> other tools, should we support them all?
>>>
>>> I'm not saying use of these tools may
On Mon, 12 Dec 2022 04:34:07 GMT, David Holmes wrote:
>>> I think it requires much broader discussion as to whether OpenJDK is
>>> actively seen to endorse these tools. Why these tools? What if there are
>>> other tools, should we support them all?
>>>
>>> I'm not saying use of these tools may
On Mon, 12 Dec 2022 01:29:14 GMT, David Holmes wrote:
>> Justin King has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
>> commit since the last revision:
>>
>> Remove UBSAN_ENABLED From spec.gmk.in
>
> src/java.base/share/native/launcher/main.c line 37:
>
>> 35: #include "jni.h"
On Mon, 12 Dec 2022 05:02:12 GMT, David Holmes wrote:
>> make/autoconf/spec.gmk.in line 459:
>>
>>> 457:
>>> 458: # UndefinedBehaviorSanitizer
>>> 459: UBSAN_ENABLED:=@UBSAN_ENABLED@
>>
>> I don't see anything reading this. ??
>
> To be clear there was a reason that `ASAN_ENABLED` was original
On Mon, 12 Dec 2022 05:48:41 GMT, Justin King wrote:
>>> I think it requires much broader discussion as to whether OpenJDK is
>>> actively seen to endorse these tools. Why these tools? What if there are
>>> other tools, should we support them all?
>>>
>>> I'm not saying use of these tools may
On Mon, 12 Dec 2022 03:26:15 GMT, Justin King wrote:
>> I think it requires much broader discussion as to whether OpenJDK is
>> actively seen to endorse these tools. Why these tools? What if there are
>> other tools, should we support them all?
>>
>> I'm not saying use of these tools may not b
> Allow building OpenJDK with UBSan. Currently the build fails when optimizing
> the image due to lots of undefined behavior (it invokes the built JVM).
> Follow up PRs will either replace the undefined behavior with well defined
> behavior or suppress errors which are intentional. The goal is t
On Fri, 9 Dec 2022 06:53:31 GMT, Justin King wrote:
> Allow building OpenJDK with UBSan. Currently the build fails when optimizing
> the image due to lots of undefined behavior (it invokes the built JVM).
> Follow up PRs will either replace the undefined behavior with well defined
> behavior o
On Mon, 12 Dec 2022 01:27:43 GMT, David Holmes wrote:
>> Allow building OpenJDK with UBSan. Currently the build fails when optimizing
>> the image due to lots of undefined behavior (it invokes the built JVM).
>> Follow up PRs will either replace the undefined behavior with well defined
>> beha
On Mon, 12 Dec 2022 03:26:15 GMT, Justin King wrote:
>> I think it requires much broader discussion as to whether OpenJDK is
>> actively seen to endorse these tools. Why these tools? What if there are
>> other tools, should we support them all?
>>
>> I'm not saying use of these tools may not b
On Mon, 12 Dec 2022 01:31:38 GMT, David Holmes wrote:
> I think it requires much broader discussion as to whether OpenJDK is actively
> seen to endorse these tools. Why these tools? What if there are other tools,
> should we support them all?
>
> I'm not saying use of these tools may not be us
On Fri, 9 Dec 2022 06:53:31 GMT, Justin King wrote:
> Allow building OpenJDK with UBSan. Currently the build fails when optimizing
> the image due to lots of undefined behavior (it invokes the built JVM).
> Follow up PRs will either replace the undefined behavior with well defined
> behavior o
On Fri, 9 Dec 2022 14:34:37 GMT, Erik Joelsson wrote:
>> Allow building OpenJDK with UBSan. Currently the build fails when optimizing
>> the image due to lots of undefined behavior (it invokes the built JVM).
>> Follow up PRs will either replace the undefined behavior with well defined
>> beha
On Fri, 9 Dec 2022 06:53:31 GMT, Justin King wrote:
> Allow building OpenJDK with UBSan. Currently the build fails when optimizing
> the image due to lots of undefined behavior (it invokes the built JVM).
> Follow up PRs will either replace the undefined behavior with well defined
> behavior o
On Fri, 9 Dec 2022 06:53:31 GMT, Justin King wrote:
> Allow building OpenJDK with UBSan. Currently the build fails when optimizing
> the image due to lots of undefined behavior (it invokes the built JVM).
> Follow up PRs will either replace the undefined behavior with well defined
> behavior o
On Fri, 9 Dec 2022 14:16:19 GMT, Robbin Ehn wrote:
> > What version of GCC are you using?
>
> gcc 11.3 with libubsan 11.2
>
> Also it seem to big overlap with -Wcast-align(=strict) for the
> warnings/errors I see and I do like that warning. Do you have an idea if the
> coverage are pretty muc
On Fri, 9 Dec 2022 06:53:31 GMT, Justin King wrote:
> Allow building OpenJDK with UBSan. Currently the build fails when optimizing
> the image due to lots of undefined behavior (it invokes the built JVM).
> Follow up PRs will either replace the undefined behavior with well defined
> behavior o
On Fri, 9 Dec 2022 13:46:07 GMT, Justin King wrote:
> What version of GCC are you using?
gcc 11.3 with libubsan 11.2
Also it seem to big overlap with -Wcast-align(=strict) for the warnings/errors
I see and I do like that warning.
Do you have an idea if the coverage are pretty much the same for
On Fri, 9 Dec 2022 06:53:31 GMT, Justin King wrote:
> Allow building OpenJDK with UBSan. Currently the build fails when optimizing
> the image due to lots of undefined behavior (it invokes the built JVM).
> Follow up PRs will either replace the undefined behavior with well defined
> behavior o
On Fri, 9 Dec 2022 06:53:31 GMT, Justin King wrote:
> Allow building OpenJDK with UBSan. Currently the build fails when optimizing
> the image due to lots of undefined behavior (it invokes the built JVM).
> Follow up PRs will either replace the undefined behavior with well defined
> behavior o
58 matches
Mail list logo
