[LLVMdev] asan coverage

[Kostya Serebryany]

Also, when are you planing to "reapply the changes or help debug"?

On Fri, Nov 15, 2013 at 9:15 AM, Kostya Serebryany <kcc at google.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 15, 2013 at 7:26 AM, Bob Wilson <bob.wilson at apple.com> wrote:
>> Hi Kostya,
>>
>> Thanks for the heads-up on this.  I haven’t had a chance to look into the
>> details yet, but it looks like these patches may be breaking our
>> bootstrapped LTO build.  Our buildbots have been failing all day, and we’re
>> still trying to figure out the problem.  I’m going to speculatively revert
>> those changes, since they were the only patches on the buildbot blame list.
>> I will either reapply the changes or help debug the problem.
>
> How could this possibly affect your LTO build?
> The option is off by default.
> Do you have any details, logs, etc?
>
>>
>> —Bob
>>
>> On Nov 14, 2013, at 5:42 AM, Kostya Serebryany <kcc at google.com> wrote:
>>
>> Bob, Justin,
>>
>> I've just committed a poor man's coverage implementation that works with
>> asan.
>> http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=194701&view=rev
>> http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=194702&view=rev
>> It provides only function-level boolean coverage (i.e. no counters, just
>> "visited or not"),
>> but is very fast and very simple (no extra sections to the binary file, etc)
>> I've tried it for Chrome's content_shell (huge and heavy binary) and the
>> overhead
>> is negligible at both run-time and shutdown-time.
>>
>> We'll be evaluating this implementation and collecting usage stats.
>> Maybe we want to implement something simple like this in the Clang coverage.
>>
>> --kcc
>>
>>