This is the mail archive of the mailing list for the glibc project.

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: glibc 2.25 seems to have broken AddressSaniitzer Inbox x glibc x sanitizer x

On Wed, 21 Feb 2018, Carlos O'Donell wrote:

> As an upstream maintainer I strongly suggest ensuring that both gcc and
> llvm have sufficient regression tests that the issues appear with newer
> glibc, this way we can know, when bootstrapping the toolchain, that something
> is wrong e.g. glibc/scripts/ does this for us today.

You also need a bot that runs those tests with current glibc, and ensure 
someone is monitoring results and reporting issues within a day or two of 
any changes being committed that cause problems.  Only detecting problems 
after a glibc version with a change has been released is too late for some 

With we detect *build* failures with mainline GCC 
(including cases where it's e.g. libgcc or libstdc++ that fails to build) 
within a day or so.  But since the focus there is on testing the build of 
glibc and its tests, that doesn't include libraries such as libsanitizer 
or libgfortran that aren't needed for building glibc tests - and it 
doesn't include any execution testing.

Joseph S. Myers

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]