Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] Enable AddressSanitizer feature on DPDK

["Lin, Xueqin" <xueqin.lin@intel.com>]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Richardson, Bruce <bruce.richardson@intel.com>
> Sent: Monday, September 13, 2021 11:22 PM
> To: Stephen Hemminger <stephen@networkplumber.org>
> Cc: Peng, ZhihongX <zhihongx.peng@intel.com>; Burakov, Anatoly
> <anatoly.burakov@intel.com>; Ananyev, Konstantin
> <konstantin.ananyev@intel.com>; dev@dpdk.org; Lin, Xueqin
> <xueqin.lin@intel.com>
> Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] Enable AddressSanitizer feature on DPDK
> 
> On Mon, Sep 13, 2021 at 08:05:58AM -0700, Stephen Hemminger wrote:
> > On Mon, 13 Sep 2021 05:27:12 +0000
> > "Peng, ZhihongX" <zhihongx.peng@intel.com> wrote:
> >
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: Stephen Hemminger <stephen@networkplumber.org>
> > > > Sent: Friday, September 10, 2021 10:48 AM
> > > > To: Peng, ZhihongX <zhihongx.peng@intel.com>
> > > > Cc: Burakov, Anatoly <anatoly.burakov@intel.com>; Ananyev,
> > > > Konstantin <konstantin.ananyev@intel.com>; dev@dpdk.org; Lin,
> > > > Xueqin <xueqin.lin@intel.com>
> > > > Subject: Re: [PATCH] Enable AddressSanitizer feature on DPDK
> > > >
> > > > On Fri, 10 Sep 2021 02:01:47 +0000 zhihongx.peng@intel.com wrote:
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > +if get_option('b_sanitize').startswith('address')
> > > > > +	cflags += '-DRTE_MALLOC_ASAN'
> > > > > +endif
> > > > > +
> > > >
> > > > This looks great, but can we make it just do-the-right-thing and
> > > > get rid of the nerd knobs (i.e no meson configure).
> > > >
> 
> There are no new meson options being added here. Turning on/off address
> sanitizing is a built-in meson option that is there already.
> 
> > > > The address sanitizer already has a way to detect if enabled.
> > > >
> > > > GCC uses:
> > > > __SANITIZE_ADDRESS__
> > > >
> > > > Clang uses:
> > > > #if defined(__has_feature)
> > > > #  if __has_feature(address_sanitizer)
> > >
> > > Tried this method you said. It can run successfully. Because gcc and
> > > clang have different Methods for determining whether to turn on the
> > > asan function, so if you judge the two methods in the code, it feels not
> simple to judge in meson.
> >
> > There is already compiler specific #ifdef's why not do this contained in one
> header file?
> >
> > The point is DPDK is trying to get away from having configuration
> > settings if at all possible. Configuration creates dependency
> > nightmares and also leaves many code paths as never tested.
> 
> Not sure I follow your point here. We need some macro to easily tell if we
> are running with address sanitization enabled or not, so as to avoid having
> the multi-compiler detection rules all over the place. The only question is
> where it's better to have this in a header file or a meson.build file.
> Given your objection and the fact that the meson.build code above looks a
> little awkward, I'd suggest putting the conditional checks in malloc_elem.h.
> 
> Is something like the following what you had in mind?
> 
>   #ifdef __SANITIZE_ADDRESS__
>   #define RTE_MALLOC_ASAN
>   #elif defined(__has_feature) && __has_feature(address_sanitizer)
>   #define RTE_MALLOC_ASAN
>   #endif
> 
> /Bruce

Agree, we will update it in V2 version and send it soon.
Thanks Bruce for your review and guide. If no other objections, need your help to ACK this feature patch.