similar to: Known limitation or intra-object-overflow not working?

https://bugzilla.netfilter.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1432 Bug ID: 1432 Summary: ebtables ebtables-2.0.11 buffer overflow on getting kernel data ( ebtables compiled with address sanitizer) Product: netfilter/iptables Version: unspecified Hardware: x86_64 OS: Debian GNU/Linux Status:

Hello, I'm quite new to LLVM, but I'm interested in memory sanitizer. The petty thing is, that 32bit addressing on Linux is not supported. Thus I tried to take the latest version of the software and to modify it, using Ubuntu 16.04 as operating system. Given the example example.c: #include <stdio.h> #include <stdlib.h> int main(int argc, char **argv) { int *a = (int

Hello LLVM devs, I'm running lots of experiments with LibFuzzer these days -- it's an amazing tool! I've noticed something weird while examining the effect of various coverage options: for one of my benchmarks, the fuzzer was achieving a higher total coverage before April 2016, when -sanitizer-coverage-prune-blocks became true by default (commit

I've finished my initial set of patches to make 32-byte shadow granularity work on x86. Here is a summary of the changes from last week: - As discussed, I added a full redzone after every stack variable. - We discussed adding a -fsanitize-address-granularity=N flag, but I found the following existing flag has been sufficient for my purposes: -asan-mapping-scale N. If anyone thinks I

Hi Alex Thanks for your email. But it seems not work. I removed the -fsanitize=address flag. The global buffer overflow message doesn't show. However, no *.sancov file is created after I run perlbench. Thus, I could not get the BB coverage. Do you have any ideas? Many Thanks Regards Muhui Alexander Potapenko <glider at google.com> 于2018年9月5日周三 下午7:14写道： > Hi Muhui, > > If

George Karpenkov <ekarpenkov at apple.com> writes: > Should -DCMAKE_CXX_COMPILER be also specified? CMake is smart enough to infer that from C_COMPILER: % grep CMAKE_CXX_COMPILER CMakeCache.txt CMAKE_CXX_COMPILER:FILEPATH=/Users/bogner/llvm-lkgc/bin/clang++ >> On Aug 24, 2017, at 11:29 AM, Justin Bogner <mail at justinbogner.com> wrote: >> >> (kcc, george:

Hi, 1. This patch adds an internal (-mllvm) option, which is basically meant for debugging. If your custom platform has a target triple, you could submit changes to llvm, clang and compiler-rt to specify any platform-specific offsets and other details. 2. Blacklist is meant to disable checking for bugs in certain functions, not to remove all instrumentation. With ASan, these are the same. With

Hello, I am currently porting memory sanitizer to a custom platform, and discovered some strange things in the existing implementation. 1. clang/llvm currently hardcode the list of supported platforms and disallow the use of a standalone msan implementation. I suppose the solution here is to submit a patch similar to https://reviews.llvm.org/D18865 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D18865>, which

Hi, 1. No, there is no custom triple for the platform. It currently uses Linux triple, and I do not think there is a possibility of upstreaming not so many changes in such a way. On the other side Apple uses the mllvm asan option to implement KASAN in XNU, so I think it will be fine to upstream a similar option, which I guess, could also be used for debugging, and may be helpful to other people

(kcc, george: sorry for the re-send, the first was from a non-list email address) My configuration for building the fuzzers in the LLVM tree doesn't seem to work any more (possibly as of moving libFuzzer to compiler-rt, but there have been a few other changes in the last week or so that may be related). I'm building with a fresh top-of-tree clang and setting -DLLVM_USE_SANITIZER=Address

Hi, I am using clang++3.9 to build a simple program with both CFI and safe-stack. I am getting linker errors when combining -fsanitize=safe-stack, -fsanitize=cfi, and -fno-sanitize-trap=all. Combining safe-stack and CFI without -fno-sanitize-trap=all works as expected. It looks like clang is attempting to link in two compiler-rt libraries, one for ubsan and one for safestack, and this causes

I think libfuzzer deserves its own flag. I view fuzzing as a smarter testing technology while sanitizers are associated with inserting additional checks into the program. The different linking behavior is another major difference. Anna. > On Apr 27, 2017, at 4:08 PM, Kostya Serebryany via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > on the one hand, -fsanitize=fuzzer might

While doing some related work I built openssh 9.3p1 with -fsanitize=address and this came up during compilation. In file included from /usr/include/string.h:535, from kex.c:34: In function 'explicit_bzero', inlined from 'kex_free_newkeys' at kex.c:743:2: /usr/include/bits/string_fortified.h:72:3: warning: '__explicit_bzero_chk' writing 48 bytes

FYI We have an upstream bootstrap bot ( http://lab.llvm.org:8011/builders/sanitizer-x86_64-linux-bootstrap) that does a number of things including running llvm/clang tests under ASan/MSan. Probably we can add a couple of steps that would checkout lld and run check-lld in ASan-ified/MSan-ified build trees. On Mon, Sep 9, 2013 at 9:00 AM, Shankar Easwaran <shankare at codeaurora.org>wrote:

George Karpenkov <ekarpenkov at apple.com> writes: > OK so with Kuba’s help I’ve found the error: with optimization, dead > stripping of produced libraries is enabled, > which removes coverage instrumentation. > > However, this has nothing to do with the move to compiler-rt, so I’m > quite skeptical on whether it has worked > beforehand. > > A trivial fix is to do:

Hi If so, is it able to disable this check. All I need is just to get the BB coverage information Regards Muhui Alexander Potapenko <glider at google.com>于2018年9月5日 周三下午6:57写道： > This is a known problem in SPECCPU2006, see > https://github.com/google/sanitizers/wiki/AddressSanitizerFoundBugs > On Wed, Sep 5, 2018 at 7:36 AM Muhui Jiang via llvm-dev > <llvm-dev at

On Mon, 2 Jul 2018 22:56:39 -0300 Elias Pereira via samba <samba at lists.samba.org> wrote: > > > > I don't know what error you are getting, even if you have posted it, > > can you post the full error. Can you please post all the lines from > > syslog around the error and not just the error. > > > The only logs that show is below. > >

(I am sending this same message to theora-dev because I think it applies to development discussion as well as user discussion.) In the discussion of having a freedom-friendly camcorder or other video device, we discussed the idea of using intra-only Theora video to make post-recording editing a much easier process, allowing things like frame-by-frame editing without the need to decode and

On Thu, Nov 12, 2015 at 8:42 PM, Kostya Serebryany <kcc at google.com> wrote: > 2 questions: > - Do you see this with the fresh llvm trunk? > - Can you prepare a minimized example? Pretty recent, I updated a couple days ago. I tried to minimize the attached but at the same time I didn't want to lose too many unions and casts in case it didn't trigger any more. $ clang

Hi Evgeniy, Can you add the step to checkout lld and build and run the unittests then ? Thanks Shankar Easwaran On 9/10/2013 4:59 AM, Evgeniy Stepanov wrote: > Does it build with libstdc++? I've got this with fresh clang, -std=c++11: > > In file included from ../projects/lld/lib/ReaderWriter/ELF/./SectionChunks.h:19: > In file included from