KernelASan: Bringing Address Sanitizer To The Linux Kernel

[phoronix]

Phoronix: KernelASan: Bringing Address Sanitizer To The Linux Kernel

Work being done by Samsung and other Linux stakeholders is bringing the Address Sanitizer capabilities found in GCC as being useful for detecting potential memory issues within the Linux kernel...

http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=MTc0NDE

[Szzz]

Address Sanitizer is the feature within GCC (and now LLVM/Clang too)

I think that correct way to say it is "Address Sanitizer is the feature within LLVM/Clang (and now GCC too)". If you look at its page it describes it as part of LLVM: https://code.google.com/p/address-sanitizer/ and gcc llinks to the same page: https://gcc.gnu.org/gcc-4.8/changes.html

[johnc]

Things I love about Phoronix:

A popup advertisement appearing over top of another popup advertisement.

[Michael]

Things I love about Phoronix:

A popup advertisement appearing over top of another popup advertisement.

It's a bug I've been trying to work out with the ad network, which they hope to have resolved today.

[sarmad]

What kind of impact does this have on performance?

[liam]

What kind of impact does this have on performance?

https://code.google.com/p/address-sanitizer/wiki/PerformanceNumbers

And this is why something like rust is needed.
Is anyone here aware that there are efforts to rewrite binutils and coreutils in rust?

[Szzz]

https://code.google.com/p/address-sa...ormanceNumbers

And this is why something like rust is needed.
Is anyone here aware that there are efforts to rewrite binutils and coreutils in rust?

Rust is good, it would be even better if they would separate program side effect from pure computations.

If redesigning things why not to create something better then binutils and coreutils? This whole concept that program takes string argument and has one input stream and one (well, two) output stream seems strange to me. What if I need two input streams? And packing all program arguments in a string means no type-checking, this is not what Rust is about. Why do we even need two languages - one for system programming and one for scripting. Well, it makes some sense but more integration between these languages would be better. I think there is a lot of room for improvement, just like Rust improves system programming.

But I think some guys will always write in C, even after we will have artificial intelligence which will write programs for us.

[coder543]

Rust is good, it would be even better if they would separate program side effect from pure computations.

If redesigning things why not to create something better then binutils and coreutils? This whole concept that program takes string argument and has one input stream and one (well, two) output stream seems strange to me. What if I need two input streams? And packing all program arguments in a string means no type-checking, this is not what Rust is about. Why do we even need two languages - one for system programming and one for scripting. Well, it makes some sense but more integration between these languages would be better. I think there is a lot of room for improvement, just like Rust improves system programming.

But I think some guys will always write in C, even after we will have artificial intelligence which will write programs for us.

I... don't think you understand what Rust is. Rust is a programming language. You're describing IPC (interprocess communication) issues at an operating system level. Mozilla is not writing a new Rust operating system. Maybe you could develop a POSIX++ architecture that looks and feels like POSIX but is hugely different (similar to how C++ looks and feels like C at a basic level, but then turns out to be drastically different) and see if you could get a POSIX++ kernel to supersede Linux... but, that isn't Mozilla's concern.

I'd love to have greater flexibility in IPC in general, but the current system works really well.