[llvm-dev] Need help with code generation

[Robinson, Paul via llvm-dev]

Could you share links to some of those bugs - might be interesting to see/compare.

If you google "cve-2014 bfd" you should find several pretty easily.
--paulr

From: David Blaikie [mailto:dblaikie at gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, March 22, 2016 2:35 PM
To: Robinson, Paul
Cc: Rafael Espíndola; llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org; Bruce Hoult
Subject: Re: [llvm-dev] Need help with code generation



On Tue, Mar 22, 2016 at 2:20 PM, Robinson, Paul <Paul_Robinson at playstation.sony.com<mailto:Paul_Robinson at playstation.sony.com>> wrote:


> -----Original Message-----
> From: llvm-dev [mailto:llvm-dev-bounces at lists.llvm.org<mailto:llvm-dev-bounces at lists.llvm.org>] On Behalf Of
> Rafael Espíndola via llvm-dev
> Sent: Tuesday, March 22, 2016 1:08 PM
> To: David Blaikie
> Cc: llvm-dev; Bruce Hoult
> Subject: Re: [llvm-dev] Need help with code generation
>
> On 22 March 2016 at 16:02, David Blaikie <dblaikie at gmail.com<mailto:dblaikie at gmail.com>> wrote:
> >
> >
> > On Tue, Mar 22, 2016 at 12:09 PM, Rafael Espíndola <llvm-
> dev at lists.llvm.org<mailto:dev at lists.llvm.org>>
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> > That's because we seem to be debating whether we'd actively reject a
> >> > patch to fix such issues, not how important they are to us to fix.
> >>
> >> I would not work on it. Including not review it while there are actual
> >> missing features to be implemented.
> >>
> >>
> >> If you want to call that a low priority bug, go for it. I don't find
> >> it honest to do that myself.
> >
> >
> > I wouldn't call this a "low priority bug". If you would not review
> patches
> > to fix it (effectively blocking patches, I assume - I take it you would
> ask
> > for such patches to be reverted if you hadn't reviewed/approved them?)
> that
> > seems different to how the rest of the LLVM community treats these sort
> of
> > issues.
>
> I agree. which is why I don't want to call it a bug.
>
> But since having a bug open for years causes far less discussion than
> otherwise I am fine with it as long people know I will retire long
> before I get to it.

llvm.org/bugs<http://llvm.org/bugs> has 7965 open bugs at the moment, and a month from now
the oldest one will have its 12th birthday.

"Nobody working on it" or even "I refuse to work on or review it"
never mind "it's really old and nobody seems to care" is different
from "it's not a bug."

If LLD evolves into a library some of these issues will become more
consequential.  BFD has certainly had security patches in the past,
specifically to avoid mishandling purposely corrupt object files.

Could you share links to some of those bugs - might be interesting to see/compare.

--paulr

>
> Cheers,
> Rafael
> _______________________________________________
> LLVM Developers mailing list
> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org<mailto: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/20160322/6d24c7b9/attachment.html>