Andres Freund writes:
> ../../../../../home/andres/src/postgresql/src/backend/nodes/nodeFuncs.c:2712:6:
> runtime error: call to function assign_query_collations_walker through
> pointer to incorrect function type 'bool (*)(struct Node *, void *)'
> /srv/dev/build/postgres/m-dev-assert-clang-san
Hi,
On 2025-03-03 16:49:09 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> Andres Freund writes:
> > I wish the sanitizer treated mismatches of void * arguments against a "real
> > type" different from other mismatches, but ...
>
> Indeed. I think we have enough coverage of that via compile-time
> checks, though -- i
Hi,
On 2025-03-03 15:00:43 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> Andres Freund writes:
> > I just upgraded buildfarm animal kestrel (a buildfarm animal running with
> > ubsan) to a newer version of clang. Unfortunately this causes it to fail.
> > ...
> > Tom, do you see any reason to not instead do the typec
Andres Freund writes:
> I just upgraded buildfarm animal kestrel (a buildfarm animal running with
> ubsan) to a newer version of clang. Unfortunately this causes it to fail.
> ...
> Tom, do you see any reason to not instead do the typecase inside
> string_compare()?
No. Have at it.
On Thu, Dec 7, 2023 at 10:18 PM Thomas Munro wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 8, 2023 at 3:57 AM Robert Haas wrote:
> > On Tue, Dec 5, 2023 at 4:01 PM Nathan Bossart
> > wrote:
> > > +1
> >
> > So, Thomas ... any chance you could commit this? So that my patch
> > stops making cfbot sad?
>
> Done. Thanks b
On Fri, Dec 8, 2023 at 3:57 AM Robert Haas wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 5, 2023 at 4:01 PM Nathan Bossart
> wrote:
> > +1
>
> So, Thomas ... any chance you could commit this? So that my patch
> stops making cfbot sad?
Done. Thanks both for the reviews.
On Tue, Dec 5, 2023 at 4:01 PM Nathan Bossart wrote:
> +1
So, Thomas ... any chance you could commit this? So that my patch
stops making cfbot sad?
--
Robert Haas
EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
On Tue, Dec 05, 2023 at 03:48:33PM -0500, Robert Haas wrote:
> The patch LGTM, too. Thanks for investigating and writing the code.
> The part about how the reserved kernel memory prevents the bug from
> appearing on 32-bit systems but not 64-bit systems running in 32-bit
> mode is pretty interestin
On Tue, Dec 5, 2023 at 1:04 PM Nathan Bossart wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 06, 2023 at 12:03:53AM +1300, Thomas Munro wrote:
> > xlogreader.c has a pointer overflow bug, as revealed by the
> > combination of -fsanitize=undefined -m32, the new 039_end_of_wal.pl
> > test and Robert's incremental backup patc
On Wed, Dec 06, 2023 at 12:03:53AM +1300, Thomas Munro wrote:
> xlogreader.c has a pointer overflow bug, as revealed by the
> combination of -fsanitize=undefined -m32, the new 039_end_of_wal.pl
> test and Robert's incremental backup patch[1]. The bad code tests
> whether an object could fit using
Hello Andres,
22.11.2022 02:15, Andres Freund wrote:
Hi,
On 2022-09-29 18:17:55 -0700, Andres Freund wrote:
Attached is a rebased version of this patch. Hopefully with a reasonable
amount of comments? I kind of wanted to add a comment to reached_main, but it
just seems to end up restating the
Hi,
On November 21, 2022 3:42:38 PM PST, Justin Pryzby wrote:
>On Mon, Nov 21, 2022 at 03:15:03PM -0800, Andres Freund wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> On 2022-09-29 18:17:55 -0700, Andres Freund wrote:
>> > Attached is a rebased version of this patch. Hopefully with a reasonable
>> > amount of comments? I
On Mon, Nov 21, 2022 at 03:15:03PM -0800, Andres Freund wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 2022-09-29 18:17:55 -0700, Andres Freund wrote:
> > Attached is a rebased version of this patch. Hopefully with a reasonable
> > amount of comments? I kind of wanted to add a comment to reached_main, but
> > it
> > just
Hi,
On 2022-09-29 18:17:55 -0700, Andres Freund wrote:
> Attached is a rebased version of this patch. Hopefully with a reasonable
> amount of comments? I kind of wanted to add a comment to reached_main, but it
> just seems to end up restating the variable name...
I've now pushed a version of thi
On Fri, Nov 18, 2022 at 9:13 AM Andres Freund wrote:
> Agreed. I had started on a set of patches for some of the SHM_QUEUE uses, but
> somehow we ended up a bit stuck on the naming of dlist_delete variant that
> afterwards zeroes next/prev so we can replace SHMQueueIsDetached() uses.
>
> Should pr
Andres Freund writes:
> On 2022-11-17 14:20:47 -0500, Robert Haas wrote:
>> Not that I object to a targeted fix
> Should we backpatch this fix? Likely this doesn't cause active breakage
> outside of 32bit builds under ubsan, but that's not an unreasonable thing to
> want to do in the backbranches
Hi,
On 2022-11-17 14:20:47 -0500, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 16, 2022 at 8:42 PM Andres Freund wrote:
> > Afaict the problem is that
> > proc = (PGPROC *) &(waitQueue->links);
> >
> > is a gross gross hack - this isn't actually a PGPROC, it's pointing to an
> > SHM_QUEUE, bu
On Wed, Nov 16, 2022 at 8:42 PM Andres Freund wrote:
> Afaict the problem is that
> proc = (PGPROC *) &(waitQueue->links);
>
> is a gross gross hack - this isn't actually a PGPROC, it's pointing to an
> SHM_QUEUE, but *not* one embedded in PGPROC. It kinda works because ->links
>
Hi,
On 2022-11-16 17:42:30 -0800, Andres Freund wrote:
> Afaict the problem is that
> proc = (PGPROC *) &(waitQueue->links);
>
> is a gross gross hack - this isn't actually a PGPROC, it's pointing to an
> SHM_QUEUE, but *not* one embedded in PGPROC. It kinda works because ->links
>
Hi,
On 2022-03-23 13:54:50 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> 0002: ugh, but my only real complaint is that __ubsan_default_options
> needs more than zero comment. Also, it's not "our" getenv is it?
>
> 0004: no opinion
Attached is a rebased version of this patch. Hopefully with a reasonable
amount of co
Hi,
On 2022-03-23 15:55:28 -0700, Andres Freund wrote:
> Originally I'd planned to mix them into existing members, but I think it'd be
> better to have dedicated ones. Applied for a few new buildfarm names for:
> {gcc,clang}-{-fsanitize=undefined,-fsanitize=address}.
They're now enabled...
taman
On 3/23/22 16:55, Andres Freund wrote:
It's particularly impressive that the cost of running with ASAN is *so* much
lower than valgrind. On my workstation a check-world with
-fsanitize=alignment,undefined,address takes 3min17s, vs 1min10s or so without
-fsanitize. Not something to always use, b
On Wed, Mar 23, 2022 at 03:58:09PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Andres Freund writes:
> > I think we should backpatch both, based on the reasoning in
> > 46ab07ffda9d6c8e63360ded2d4568aa160a7700 ?
>
> Yeah, I suppose. Is anyone going to step up and run a buildfarm
> member with ubsan enabled?
thorn
Andres Freund writes:
> Running with asan found an existing use-after-free bug in pg_waldump (*), a
> bug in
> dshash_seq_next() next that probably can't be hit in HEAD and a bug in my
> shared memory stats patch. I count that as a success.
Nice!
regards, tom lane
Hi,
On 2022-03-23 13:12:34 -0700, Andres Freund wrote:
> I'm planning to enable it on two of mine. Looks like gcc and clang find
> slightly different things, so I was intending to enable it on one of each.
Originally I'd planned to mix them into existing members, but I think it'd be
better to hav
Hi,
On 2022-03-23 15:58:09 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Andres Freund writes:
> > I think we should backpatch both, based on the reasoning in
> > 46ab07ffda9d6c8e63360ded2d4568aa160a7700 ?
>
> Yeah, I suppose. Is anyone going to step up and run a buildfarm
> member with ubsan enabled? (I'm already
Andres Freund writes:
> I think we should backpatch both, based on the reasoning in
> 46ab07ffda9d6c8e63360ded2d4568aa160a7700 ?
Yeah, I suppose. Is anyone going to step up and run a buildfarm
member with ubsan enabled? (I'm already checking -fsanitize=alignment
on longfin, but it seems advisab
Hi,
On 2022-03-23 11:21:37 -0700, Andres Freund wrote:
> On 2022-03-23 13:54:50 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> > Andres Freund writes:
> > > I tried to run postgres with ubsan to debug something.
> >
> > For 0001, could we just replace configure's dlopen check with the
> > dlsym check? Or are you afr
Hi,
On 2022-03-23 13:54:50 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Andres Freund writes:
> > I tried to run postgres with ubsan to debug something.
>
> For 0001, could we just replace configure's dlopen check with the
> dlsym check? Or are you afraid of reverse-case failures?
Yea, I was worried about that. B
Andres Freund writes:
> I tried to run postgres with ubsan to debug something.
For 0001, could we just replace configure's dlopen check with the
dlsym check? Or are you afraid of reverse-case failures?
0002: ugh, but my only real complaint is that __ubsan_default_options
needs more than zero co
30 matches
Mail list logo
