On Fri, Jul 14, 2017 at 5:23 AM, Dmitry Vyukov wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 13, 2017 at 11:18 PM, Kostya Serebryany wrote:
>>> > Hi
>>> >
>>> > I wrote a test for "-fsanitize-coverage=trace-cmp" .
>>> >
>>> > Is there an
On Wed, Oct 1, 2014 at 11:38 AM, Toon Moene wrote:
> On 10/01/2014 08:00 PM, Kostya Serebryany wrote:
>>
>> -gcc folks.
>>
>> Why not use clang then?
>> It offers many more nice features.
>
>
> What's the Fortran front-end called for clang (or do y
linked from
https://code.google.com/p/memory-sanitizer/wiki/MemorySanitizer
> 2) runtime overhead comparison with valgrind
Yep. We have the fresh data, need to publish in wiki.
--kcc
>
> David
>
> On Wed, Oct 1, 2014 at 9:07 AM, Kostya Serebryany wrote:
>> [as text for real
[as text for real this time]
Sanitizer compiler module sizes in LLVM (in lines):
1823 AddressSanitizer.cpp
2780 MemorySanitizer.cpp
564 ThreadSanitizer.cpp
Also note, that msan is the hardest to deploy among others sanitizers
because it requires to compile *everything*,
including libc++/libs
