[llvm-dev] Need help with code generation

[David Blaikie via llvm-dev]

On Tue, Mar 22, 2016 at 11:43 AM, Rafael Espíndola <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>
wrote:

> >
> > This is a completely inappropriate comparison. LibreSSL is a
> cryptographic library. Creating a high-quality cryptographic library
> requires much more than eliminating buffer overruns (etc.).
>
> What I don't get this what is the point of a "somewhat secure". Does
> it make a difference if takes 5 minutes of 5 hours to find a buffer
> overflow?
>
> >> What allocator would you start with?
> >>
> >
> > We recently had a bunch of patches fixing issues found when fuzz testing
> LLVM with ASAN, and I thought that was a very positive development.
> >
>
> And today it is still way easier to crash llvm than lld. I posted two
> crashes with just what I noticed going on the list.  No one even
> posted an ELF that would crash lld.
>

No, we were responding to the stated policy that it's intentional that LLD
would crash/UB on certain inputs. We're debating that policy/intention.


> It is really annoying how much people care about "security" to
> criticize my work, but never enough to send a patch. llvm.org/pr21466
> is open since Nov 2014. That is on the side of the project that should
> be handling broken files.


> Would it end this thread if I went that way? Just say that there are
> bugs in lld and just not fix them for over a year?
>

It would make a big difference if it was "Yes, these are bugs but not high
priority for the current/active contributors to invest time in fixing (but
happy to review patches to fix them, etc)" versus "these are not bugs/it's
highly unlikely we'd accept patches to fix them".

Across the project we certainly prioritize bugs based on impact to those
who are involved - we tend to fix Clang crash-on-valid faster than
crash-on-invalid (certainly Kostya's been frustrated by lack of traction on
some of the fuzzer findings - because few people need a security hardened
LLVM/Clang, but generally "doesn't crash" is considered to be a
valid/accepted goal, even if it's not hardened). Some bugs impact some
users more than others, so are more important to some developers. 'tis the
way of things.

- Dave


>
> Cheers,
> Rafael
> _______________________________________________
> LLVM Developers mailing list
> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org
> http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20160322/fbd75efd/attachment.html>