Add default sanitizers to TargetOptions #147043
Open
+43
−31
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
|
These commits modify compiler targets. |
rustbot
added
A-LLVM
rustbot
added
the
T-compiler
|
rustbot has assigned @petrochenkov. Use |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
ilovepi
force-pushed
the
default-sanitizers
branch
from
2fa7a35 to
9ee9c2f
Compare
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
|
Note: Some targets, like Android, may also want to set this option, but I'm not sure who's handling rustc integration for them ATM. |
petrochenkov
added
S-waiting-on-author
ilovepi
force-pushed
the
default-sanitizers
branch
from
9ee9c2f to
b003810
Compare
petrochenkov
added
S-waiting-on-review
Some sanitizers are part of a system's ABI, like the shadow call stack on Aarch64 and RISC-V Fuchsia. Typically ABI options have other spellings, but LLVM has, for historical reasons, marked this as a sanitizer instead of an alternate ABI option. As a result, Fuchsia targets may not be compiled against the correct ABI unless this option is set. This hasn't caused correctness problems, since the backend reserves the SCS register, and thus preserves its value. But this is an issue for unwinding, as the SCS will not be an array of PCs describing the call complete call chain, and will have gaps from callers that don't use the correct ABI. In the long term, I'd like to see all the sanitizer configs that all frontends copy from clang moved into llvm's libFrontend, and exposed so that frontend consumers can use a small set of simple APIs to use sanitizers in a consistent way across the LLVM ecosystem, but that work is not yet ready today.
ilovepi
force-pushed
the
default-sanitizers
branch
from
b003810 to
e207006
Compare
|
Some changes occurred in compiler/rustc_codegen_ssa Some changes occurred in cfg and check-cfg configuration cc @Urgau |
|
This PR was rebased onto a different master commit. Here's a range-diff highlighting what actually changed. Rebasing is a normal part of keeping PRs up to date, so no action is needed—this note is just to help reviewers. |
petrochenkov
added
S-waiting-on-review
|
Thanks! |
bors
added
S-waiting-on-bors
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
4 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Some sanitizers are part of a system's ABI, like the shadow call stack on Aarch64 and RISC-V Fuchsia. Typically ABI options have other spellings, but LLVM has, for historical reasons, marked this as a sanitizer instead of an alternate ABI option. As a result, Fuchsia targets may not be compiled against the correct ABI unless this option is set. This hasn't caused correctness problems, since the backend reserves the SCS register, and thus preserves its value. But this is an issue for unwinding, as the SCS will not be an array of PCs describing the call complete call chain, and will have gaps from callers that don't use the correct ABI.
In the long term, I'd like to see all the sanitizer configs that all frontends copy from clang moved into llvm's libFrontend, and exposed so that frontend consumers can use a small set of simple APIs to use sanitizers in a consistent way across the LLVM ecosystem, but that work is not yet ready today.