[LLVMdev] Sanitizers libs in Compiler-RT
samsonov at google.com
Thu Jan 30 11:55:13 PST 2014
On Thu, Jan 30, 2014 at 11:07 PM, Renato Golin <renato.golin at linaro.org>wrote:
> Hi all,
> Can anyone explain me what was the rationale behind putting the sanitizer
> libraries in compiler-rt?
> The sanitizers only work properly in x86_64 and I don't see anyone even
> testing to any other platform, while compiler-rt should be a substitute for
> libgcc on all platforms, at least that's the goal, and linking the success
> of the RT library to the success of the sanitizers is a bit of an
> oversight, IMHO.
> I'm spending 99% of the time to make compiler-rt compiler on ARM using
> CMake by fiddling the sanitizers' tests, lit config files and CMake
> scripts, which is a bit annoying...
If you're only interested in building compiler-rt library for ARM, and not
interested in supporting sanitizers on that platform, you can just avoid
building them on ARM. You're right that it takes explicit effort to enable
building sanitizers on ARM, but IMO that's not accidental or bad - we
*don't* want to build them unless there is an interest in support.
> Long term, would it be possible / desirable to split them into compiler-rt
> and sanitizer-rt?
> LLVM Developers mailing list
> LLVMdev at cs.uiuc.edu http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu
Alexey Samsonov, MSK
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the llvm-dev