Call For Vote: Project Tsan
martinrb at google.com
Fri Feb 15 23:39:21 UTC 2019
There may be a cultural expectations gap.
Companies (like Google) might make the toolchain a part of their basic
computing infrastructure; build everything from source, and use a tsan that
comes with the one blessed toolchain used to build everything else.
Linux distros (like Red Hat) probably also try to build most binaries with
a preferred toolchain, but there is a much wider promise of ABI
compatibility. In particular, part of the value proposition of having a
Linux distro is users not having to rebuild from source, and being able to
combine binaries built by others, using different toolchains.
On Fri, Feb 15, 2019 at 3:54 AM Florian Weimer <fweimer at redhat.com> wrote:
> * Jean Christophe Beyler:
> > Our internal version is built on top of it so we currently are
> > planning to do the same in this project. Are there any issues you can
> > foresee with doing this?
> The interceptors in the sanitizers are extremely problematic from a ABI
> compatibility perspective. We can manage that if we bundle them with a
> toolchain version they have been tested with, but this might not
> necessarily be the case with an OpenJDK build that is not supplied by
> the toolchain vendor.
> My concern is that would basically freeze toolchain-internal interfaces
> in stone because changing them would break existing OpenJDK binaries.
More information about the discuss