From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 40226 invoked by alias); 12 Sep 2016 09:31:04 -0000 Mailing-List: contact libc-alpha-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: libc-alpha-owner@sourceware.org Received: (qmail 40215 invoked by uid 89); 12 Sep 2016 09:31:03 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-4.2 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,SPF_HELO_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 spammy=Large, Hx-languages-length:684, approximation, serebryany X-HELO: mx1.redhat.com Subject: Re: [PATCH BZ#20422] Do not allow asan/msan/tsan and fortify at the same time. To: Kostya Serebryany , Maxim Ostapenko References: <57CDAB08.8060601@samsung.com> <8d2403c8-466d-8f1a-e563-8b729deef9ce@redhat.com> <57CE8965.7050505@samsung.com> Cc: GNU C Library , Yuri Gribov From: Florian Weimer Message-ID: <82777040-18f6-5686-5485-2ea338c74a4b@redhat.com> Date: Mon, 12 Sep 2016 09:31:00 -0000 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.2.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2016-09/txt/msg00195.txt.bz2 On 09/10/2016 12:36 AM, Kostya Serebryany wrote: >> I thought we should compile everything except Glibc, no? Compiling Glibc >> with MSan would be tricky, that's why it needs interceptors. > > Correct. Why? Large parts of glibc are just another library and not that low-level. Sure, it is quite a bit of work to disentangle the low-level bits from those that can be instrumented, but so is writing correct interceptors which actually follow glibc behavior and are not merely approximation of the core functionality. (I'm not talking about memset, but high-level things like getpwuid or glob.) Florian