- User Since
- Oct 22 2018, 10:54 PM (104 w, 6 d)
Aug 6 2020
update error message based on review feedback
Aug 3 2020
Jul 29 2020
Jul 27 2020
Jul 21 2020
Nov 7 2018
I am not saying these cannot coexist, just that SBCC doesn't require FreeBSD to maintain its own trace implementations (i.e. all the __sanitizer_cov_trace* routines). Again, I do not know if SBCC can be used for syzkaller; if it cannot, then this whole discussion is moot. But if we can leverage SBCC, it would be worth exploring.
Nov 6 2018
We is NetApp; we use this internally to gather code coverage metrics as well as input to profile guided optimization of the kernel. It is not public, but I think we can push it upstream if there is interest.
Oct 23 2018
I understand the main objective with this change is to enable syzkaller, but is Clang's coverage sanitizer the only way to implement KCOV for this purpose? I ask because we have (and use) Clang's SBCC to get coverage data out of the kernel. It would be nice to not have two KCOV implementations. :)