similar to: Hang generating sanitizer tests

> On 31 May 2018, at 06:19, via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > When I run "make check-all" with ToT I am seeing what looks like a hang > generating sanitizer tests: > > [...] > [100%] Generating dynamic/Asan-x86_64-calls-Dynamic-Test > make[3]: Leaving directory '/build/debug' > [100%] Built target

Just to follow-up, I'm now encountering this as well. I'm doing this on Linux. It seems that when linking with the most-recently built clang, the unit tests are taking a while to complete. It's notably not using more than 1 thread, and if using `lld` I would have expected the linker to still be running in parallel. I'm doing this on a debug build, so that might help narrow it

> When I run 'djpeg' on JellyBean, ASan reports the error message below. > > ==28210==Shadow memory range interleaves with an existing memory > mapping. ASan cannot proceed correctly. ABORTING. Got figured out. I needed to use TARGET_LDFLAGS. LOCAL_LDFLAGS seems to be ignored in my clang build. LOCAL_CFLAGS += -fsanitize=address TARGET_LDFLAGS +=-fsanitize=address -target

I have simple standalone ASan examples working on Android, and now I'd like to try using ASan with the Android build system. I'm building the release_33 branch of llvm+clang+compiler-rt with CMake. To test, I'm looking at libjpg, because with just a small change its Android.mk it compiles in a few seconds and without needing any additional dependencies. When I run 'djpeg' on

On 9/13/17 10:31 AM, Peter Bergner via llvm-dev wrote: > On 9/12/17 8:15 PM, Bill Seurer via llvm-dev wrote: >> I updated one of my powerpc64le llvm test systems to Fedora 25 and I >> started getting a whole bunch of sanitizer test case failures.  I tried >> testing some earlier revisions on the new OS that had worked fine under >> the old but they generate the same

On Thu, Apr 10, 2014 at 4:43 PM, Reid Kleckner <rnk at google.com> wrote: > msan isn't usable without an instrumented C++ standard library. > > The script in question is here: > > https://code.google.com/p/address-sanitizer/source/browse/trunk/build/scripts/slave/buildbot_bootstrap.sh > Thanks, Reid. I've gotten the script and I'm now running it locally.

Hello I had build llvm-3.9 (having clang-3.9 and compiler-rt-3.9). I want to run asan on both 32 bit architecture as well as 64 bit architecture. Compiling it with -m32 I am getting following error: /usr/bin/ld: cannot find ~/llvm/build/bin/../lib/clang/3.9.0/lib/linux/libclang_rt.asan-i386.a: No such file or directory clang-3.9: error: linker command failed with exit code 1 (use -v to see

I'm trying to understand why the buildbot sanitizer-ppc64-linux1 fails due to my latest patch. It was in llvm::GlobalValue while the reported failure is: strcspn-2.c.tmp: /home/buildbots/sanitizerslave1/sanitizer-ppc64-1/build/llvm/projects/compiler-rt/test/asan/TestCases/strcspn-2.c:17: int main(int, char **): Assertion `r == sizeof(s1) - 1' failed. where strcspn-2.c (below) tests the

You need llvm-symbolizer in PATH. On Apr 11, 2014 3:16 AM, "Diego Novillo" <dnovillo at google.com> wrote: > OK, so now I've gotten a build but the output from asan is less than > helpful: > > $ llvm/x/llvm_build_asan/./bin/opt llvm/x/llvm/test/Other/optimization-remarks-inline.ll > -inline -pass-remarks=inline -S >

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. 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, Is this reproducible? > Fuzzing is a probabilistic business and one or even two runs don't prove > much. > I've reproduced the behavior on two different machines. Attached is a script to do so. To use the script, - create an empty folder and copy both prune-blocks.sh and ff-http-parser.sh in there - ensure clang and clang++ are in your $PATH - cd /path/to/prune-blocks.sh

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

> On Sep 21, 2016, at 12:56 PM, Kostya Serebryany <kcc at google.com> wrote: > > > > On Wed, Sep 21, 2016 at 12:32 PM, Mehdi Amini <mehdi.amini at apple.com <mailto:mehdi.amini at apple.com>> wrote: > >> On Sep 21, 2016, at 9:36 AM, Kostya Serebryany via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org <mailto:llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>> wrote:

> On Sep 21, 2016, at 9:36 AM, Kostya Serebryany via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > Exciting! > > (btw, I'd prefer libfuzzer at googlegroups.com <mailto:libfuzzer at googlegroups.com> for such discussions, please start new topics there) You mean a LLVM library has a separate mailing-list? Why? — Mehdi > > I can reproduce this too, but

Hello everyone, I have noticed that there is a BoundsChecking.c under lib/Transforms/Instrumentation/. I am wondering how to use this tool and which type of bugs it targets. Are the tool provide the same functionality with Address Aanitizer? Thanks a lot -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL:

> On Sep 1, 2016, at 9:20 PM, Greg Parker <gparker at apple.com> wrote: > >> On Sep 1, 2016, at 9:06 PM, llvm.buildmaster at lab.llvm.org wrote: >> >> The Buildbot has detected a new failure on builder sanitizer-x86_64-linux-fast while building llvm. >> Full details are available at: >>

Hello This link didn't work for me. As I am getting error whose meaning is - there are no options as -arch i386 -arch x86_64. How should I remove this error? On Wed, Mar 22, 2017 at 6:11 PM, 陳韋任 <chenwj.cs97g at g2.nctu.edu.tw> wrote: > Hi Aayushi, > > Seems the link [1] answers your question. > > [1] http://stackoverflow.com/questions/28640585/build- >

Hi all, I have been experiencing the failure of the address sanitizer regression tests for a PPC64 target (Power7 machine). My understanding is that most of the failures are related with the fact the stack is not being dumped. I tried to understand what might be wrong and started by looking into the null_deref.cc test as it hangs during the test run. I observe that after the detection of the

Hello I am willing to make changes in Address Sanitizer for experimentation. But as I am a naive user I am confused with the fact that if I make changes to Address Sanitizer do I have to rebuild the whole LLVM. Could somebody please help me figure out a way in which I can make changes to address sanitizer and do not have to compile the whole LLVM. Aayushi Agrawal -------------- next part