[llvm-dev] sancov reporting all locations as <invalid>:0

[Justin Bogner via llvm-dev]

So I tried using full debug info and it fails the same way, which is
probably to be expected. After poking around in test/tools/sancov I'm
fairly sure the problem is that I'm on macOS, given that almost all of
the tests there have "REQUIRES: x86_64-linux".

Mike Aizatsky <aizatsky at google.com> writes:
> I'll need more details then. Maybe you can share the binary & its .sancov
> file? Or if you have a way to reproduce it?
>
> On Tue, Mar 7, 2017 at 1:23 PM Kostya Serebryany <kcc at google.com> wrote:
>
>> On Tue, Mar 7, 2017 at 12:50 PM, Mike Aizatsky <aizatsky at google.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> Justin,
>>
>> I haven't seen this before. I suspect it is because of line-tables-only.
>> Can you try it with full debug info?
>>
>>
>> That would be strange.
>> -gline-tables-only is *the* recommended flag for all of the sanitizers,
>> I'd expect it to work.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Mar 7, 2017 at 12:36 PM Kostya Serebryany <kcc at google.com> wrote:
>>
>> +aizatsky
>>
>> On Tue, Mar 7, 2017 at 12:34 PM, Justin Bogner <mail at justinbogner.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> I'm working on a fuzzer using libFuzzer and I wanted to take a look at
>> how my coverage was doing, as per the instructions here:
>>
>>   http://llvm.org/docs/LibFuzzer.html#how-good-is-my-fuzzer
>>
>> First of all, I suspect the instructions there are out of date, but
>> passing -dump_coverage=1 to the binary rather than setting ASAN_OPTIONS
>> generated a .sancov file for me.
>>
>> However, when I inspect this with the sancov tool, all of the line
>> numbers it reports are "<invalid>:0". I can list the covered and
>> uncovered functions successfully, but without locations it's really hard
>> to do anything with that information.
>>
>> I've built with -gline-tables-only, as is the default when building llvm
>> with sanitizers enabled.
>>
>> Have you seen this before? Am I doing something obviously wrong?
>>
>>
>> --
>> Mike
>> Sent from phone
>>
>> --
> Mike
> Sent from phone