Hi
I updated the patch and put it in attachment.
gcc/ChangeLog:
2017-09-04 Wish Wu
* asan.c (initialize_sanitizer_builtins):
* builtin-types.def (BT_FN_VOID_UINT8_UINT8):
On Sun, Sep 3, 2017 at 12:38 PM, 吴潍浠(此彼) wrote:
> Hi
> I will update the patch according to your requirements, and with some my
> suggestions.
> It will take me one or two days.
Thanks! No hurry, just wanted to make sure you still want to pursue this.
> Wish Wu
>
> -
Hi
I will update the patch according to your requirements, and with some my
suggestions.
It will take me one or two days.
Wish Wu
--
From:Dmitry Vyukov
Time:2017 Sep 3 (Sun) 18:21
To:Jakub Jelinek
Cc:Wish Wu ; gcc ; gcc-patches
;
On Sun, Sep 3, 2017 at 12:19 PM, Dmitry Vyukov wrote:
> On Sun, Sep 3, 2017 at 12:01 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>> On Sun, Sep 03, 2017 at 10:50:16AM +0200, Dmitry Vyukov wrote:
>>> What we instrument in LLVM is _comparisons_ rather than control
>>> structures. So that would be:
>>> _4 = x_8(D)
On Sun, Sep 3, 2017 at 12:01 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Sun, Sep 03, 2017 at 10:50:16AM +0200, Dmitry Vyukov wrote:
>> What we instrument in LLVM is _comparisons_ rather than control
>> structures. So that would be:
>> _4 = x_8(D) == 98;
>> For example, result of the comparison can be store
On Sun, Sep 03, 2017 at 10:50:16AM +0200, Dmitry Vyukov wrote:
> What we instrument in LLVM is _comparisons_ rather than control
> structures. So that would be:
> _4 = x_8(D) == 98;
> For example, result of the comparison can be stored into a bool struct
> field, and then used in branching long
On Fri, Sep 1, 2017 at 6:23 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 21, 2017 at 01:38:17PM +0800, 吴潍浠(此彼) wrote:
>> Hi Jeff
>>
>> I have signed the copyright assignment, and used the name 'Wish Wu' .
>> Should I send you a copy of my assignment ?
>>
>> The attachment is my new patch with small chan
On Fri, Jul 21, 2017 at 01:38:17PM +0800, 吴潍浠(此彼) wrote:
> Hi Jeff
>
> I have signed the copyright assignment, and used the name 'Wish Wu' .
> Should I send you a copy of my assignment ?
>
> The attachment is my new patch with small changes.
> Codes are checked by ./contrib/check_GNU_style.sh, e
On Fri, Jul 21, 2017 at 1:38 AM, 吴潍浠(此彼) wrote:
> Hi Jeff
>
> I have signed the copyright assignment, and used the name 'Wish Wu' .
> Should I send you a copy of my assignment ?
Your assignment now is on file in the FSF Copyright Assignment list
where Jeff, I and other maintainers can see it. We
Hi Jeff
I have signed the copyright assignment, and used the name 'Wish Wu' .
Should I send you a copy of my assignment ?
The attachment is my new patch with small changes.
Codes are checked by ./contrib/check_GNU_style.sh, except some special files.
With
--
On Sat, Jul 15, 2017 at 9:21 AM, 吴潍浠(此彼) wrote:
> Hi
>
> Implementing __sanitizer_cov_trace_cmp[1248]_const is OK .
> And I will try to find some determinate way to judge this comparison is for
> loop or not.
> Because all the loops(for() or while()) seem to be transformed to "if" and
> "goto" b
Hi
Implementing __sanitizer_cov_trace_cmp[1248]_const is OK .
And I will try to find some determinate way to judge this comparison is for
loop or not.
Because all the loops(for() or while()) seem to be transformed to "if" and
"goto" before running sancov pass.
Does it necessary to include APIs
On Fri, Jul 14, 2017 at 11:17 PM, Kostya Serebryany wrote:
> Hi
>
> I wrote a test for "-fsanitize-coverage=trace-cmp" .
>
> Is there anybody tells me if these codes could be merged into gcc ?
Nice!
We are currently working on Linux kernel fuzzing
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 anybody tells me if these codes could be merged into gcc ?
>>>
>>>
>>> Nice!
>>>
>>> We
On Thu, Jul 13, 2017 at 11:18 PM, Kostya Serebryany wrote:
>> > Hi
>> >
>> > I wrote a test for "-fsanitize-coverage=trace-cmp" .
>> >
>> > Is there anybody tells me if these codes could be merged into gcc ?
>>
>>
>> Nice!
>>
>> We are currently working on Linux kernel fuzzing that use the
>> comp
On 07/10/2017 06:07 AM, 吴潍浠(此彼) wrote:
> Hi
>
> I write some codes to make gcc support comparison-guided fuzzing.
> It is very like
> http://clang.llvm.org/docs/SanitizerCoverage.html#tracing-data-flow .
> With -fsanitize-coverage=trace-cmp the compiler will insert extra
> instrumentation around
On Thu, Jul 13, 2017 at 12:41 PM, Wish Wu wrote:
> Hi
>
> In fact, under linux with "return address" and file "/proc/self/maps",
> we can give unique id for every comparison.
Yes, it's doable. But you expressed worries about performance hit of
merging callbacks for different sizes. Mapping pc + i
Hi
In fact, under linux with "return address" and file "/proc/self/maps",
we can give unique id for every comparison.
For fuzzing, we may give 3 bits for every comparison as marker of if
"<", "==" or ">" is showed. :D
With Regards
Wish Wu of Ant-financial Light-Year Security Lab
On Thu, Jul 13,
Hi
In my perspective:
1. Do we need to assign unique id for every comparison ?
Yes, I suggest to implement it like -fsanitize-coverage=trace-pc-guard .
Because some fuzzing targets may invoke dlopen() like functions to
load libraries(modules) after fork(), while these libraries are
compil
On Tue, Jul 11, 2017 at 1:59 PM, Wish Wu wrote:
> Hi
>
> I wrote a test for "-fsanitize-coverage=trace-cmp" .
>
> Is there anybody tells me if these codes could be merged into gcc ?
Nice!
We are currently working on Linux kernel fuzzing that use the
comparison tracing. We use clang at the momen
Hi
I wrote a test for "-fsanitize-coverage=trace-cmp" .
Is there anybody tells me if these codes could be merged into gcc ?
Index: gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/sancov/basic3.c
===
--- gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/sancov/basic3.c (nonexistent)
+++ g
21 matches
Mail list logo
