From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 18012 invoked by alias); 16 Oct 2012 22:54:12 -0000 Received: (qmail 18003 invoked by uid 22791); 16 Oct 2012 22:54:11 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-6.1 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,KHOP_RCVD_TRUST,KHOP_THREADED,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,RCVD_IN_HOSTKARMA_YE,RP_MATCHES_RCVD X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mail-qa0-f47.google.com (HELO mail-qa0-f47.google.com) (209.85.216.47) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Tue, 16 Oct 2012 22:54:07 +0000 Received: by mail-qa0-f47.google.com with SMTP id i29so488020qaf.20 for ; Tue, 16 Oct 2012 15:54:06 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=message-id:date:from:organization:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc :subject:references:in-reply-to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding:x-gm-message-state; bh=1adp8NuhlIrHS4ob7LA+yv8kBIiwvSfqwvpVwPgy8pc=; b=O9YoQYk6M140a+dReLvxNLdp0BBPzsi+V0tjGT3uoi//oyTscWiaHcJJrD26vqtQvx 4J+TqZR0ak6ejmwbsPpbtIhB6hcJ04bNU4GBXNg8YUPLa9FUUiLMplhw8HD1jRT1HlXG wgxbWgJvEfO2CWi2tdR3lvMzdqjLr37r/8M4H7kuVBiv0lkQm8aVPb+X+A1v2dJcAjd4 eEe2xGLD15jOBihQdqOQKDEEN2gz+X7Ebn30HrSP08c8a8upr1Q410x8TOBXBX4/RlZ2 Jn+W3l3TOXNzobrEhtABGj9xtAI/DMpiQy5+f/ljy00nkK0VvCu/uwlpJb5+jXQP8C5N dsfg== Received: by 10.49.1.36 with SMTP id 4mr38509299qej.46.1350428046403; Tue, 16 Oct 2012 15:54:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: from urs-home.corp.google.com ([172.26.43.129]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id z9sm18115168qeg.9.2012.10.16.15.54.04 (version=SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Tue, 16 Oct 2012 15:54:05 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <507DE58C.7080902@google.com> Date: Tue, 16 Oct 2012 22:56:00 -0000 From: Diego Novillo User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.8; rv:16.0) Gecko/20121010 Thunderbird/16.0.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Ian Lance Taylor CC: Eric Botcazou , gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org, Rainer Orth Subject: Re: [asan] Emit GIMPLE directly, small cleanups References: <20121011163847.GE584@tucnak.redhat.com> <2660658.ZncXK9oGdv@polaris> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQmc6ork7DSxj1BFCr8chuUWAGnrIIHy8CstFuUIdl8yU55Zw6rIMnhFiUMoL28DJk+IL5kGtwo1CLk+Vy5SqFL1WSTvFdFtBfFzKTXjQSf067cKX9ge3EHy2HfBCalaaQ45N42j/tI2xrvQxEGGqX+MRancX58iblWxCuvxCbck0mmQAbBd805zT8APynztAkFafRnn X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact gcc-patches-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-patches-owner@gcc.gnu.org X-SW-Source: 2012-10/txt/msg01600.txt.bz2 On 2012-10-16 18:50 , Ian Lance Taylor wrote: > That is fine with me as long as we acknowledge that the upstream > sources don't care about GCC and will think it is absurd that they > should modify their code to carry untested and unmaintained > GCC-specific annotations. It would be one thing if the GCC-specific > annotations were clearly better, but in fact I would say that they are > clearly worse. Precisely. Eric, Rainer, what do you think of the other two options I outlined in my earlier message? 1- Copy the upstream testsuite into gcc/testsuite/asan. This gives us the flexibility of adding new tests as the GCC implementation matures. 2- Deal with libasan as we deal with zlib/boehm-gc. I prefer option #1, personally. Diego.